On Monday, the Supreme Court requested the Centre’s response to a petition filed by the Association of Medical Consultants (AMC), Mumbai, challenging Section 34 (Rights of Persons to Practice) of the National Commission for 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 petition filed by AMC Mumbai and scheduled the issue for further hearing on November 4. The petitioner AMC is an organisation of around 11,000 doctors who practise in Bombay and western India. Sunil Fernandes, an advocate, represented the petitioner.
In its petition, AMC Mumbai asked the Centre to nullify or set aside or modify Section 34 (Rights of Persons to Practice) of the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020, as well as Section 34 (Rights of Persons to Practice) of the National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020.
The petitioner also asked for an appropriate writ, order, or direction to quash/set aside/modify 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, allowing PG scholars of Shalya and Shalakya to perform 58 surgical procedures after completing a Post Graduate Degree in Ayurveda.
The Petitioner stated that it is gravely offended by the contested legislations, which attempt to erase the long-standing disparities and contrasts between these two broad types of medical care.
“The Impugned Legislations are challenged on the grounds of being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, so far as it enables the Practitioners of Indian System of Medicine / Homeopathy to practice Allopathy and perform Surgeries, thereby causing grave prejudice to the Public Health, Medical Infrastructure and Right to Life including the Right to Correct and Prompt Medical Aid as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution,” the petition said.
According to the petition, Section 34 (3) of the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine Act, 2020 and the National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020 allow individuals who are already on the State Register of Practitioners to continue practising even if they lack the medical qualifications required by the Acts.
According to the petition, this clause guarantees the right of a person who has been practising the Indian System of Medicine/Homeopathy for the previous 5 years in a State to continue practising in that State where a State Register is not kept as of the date of the Acts’ commencement.
The Impugned Legislations, without any justification or proper explanation, allow practitioners of Homeopathy or the Indian system of medicine to perform surgical procedures and use the nomenclature of “surgeons” by way of Section 34 (1)(b) of the Impugned Acts, which in the ordinary course, lies within the domain of practitioners of allopathy or modern medicine.
“The National Medical Commission Act 2019, which governs the practice of allopathic doctors and ensures maintenance of highest standards of practice in this field of medicine, defines the term ‘Medicine’ under Section 2(j) to read as “modern scientific medicine in all its branches and includes surgery and obstetrics, but does not include veterinary medicine and surgery”. The National Commission for Homoeopathy Act, 2020 has not defined the term medicine or surgery,” the plea said.
