+

SC seeks Centre’s response on medical body’s plea

The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre’s response to a plea filed by the Association of Medical Consultants (AMC), Mumbai, challenging Section 34 (Rights of Persons to practice) of the National Commission for the Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020 and the National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020.A bench of Justice Hemant Gupta and […]

The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre’s response to a plea filed by the Association of Medical Consultants (AMC), Mumbai, challenging Section 34 (Rights of Persons to practice) of the National Commission for the Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020 and the National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020.
A bench of Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sudhanshu Dulia sought a response from the Centre and others on a plea filed by AMC Mumbai and listed the matter for November 4 for further hearing. The petitioner AMC is an association of around 11,000 doctors practicing in Bombay and western India. The petitioner was represented by advocate Sunil Fernandes.
AMC Mumbai, in its plea, sought direction to the Centre for quashing or setting aside or modification of Section 34 (Rights of Persons to practice) of the National Commission for the Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020 and for quashing or setting aside or modification of Section 34 (Rights of Persons to practice) of the National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020.
The petitioner also sought to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing/setting aside/modification of Regulation 10(9) of the Indian Medicine Central Council (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations, 2016, as amended by the Indian Medicine Central Council (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Amendment Regulations, 2020, thereby allowing PG scholars of Shalya and Shalakya to perform 58 surgical procedures after completion of a Post Graduate Degree in the Ayurveda stream of medicine.
The petitioner said that it is grievously aggrieved by the impugned legislation which seeks to obliterate the age-old differences and distinctions between these two broad forms of medicinal treatment.
“The impugned legislations are challenged on the grounds that they violate Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution insofar as they allow practitioners of the Indian System of Medicine/Homeopathy to practice allopathy and perform surgeries, thereby causing grave prejudice to public health, medical infrastructure, and right to life, including the right to correct and prompt medical aid as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution,” the petition stated.

Tags: