Challenge High Court order relating to Ayurveda

Delhi government to challenge High Court order relating to Ayurveda, Unani docs

Written by Pragya Kaushika | New Delhi | Published:September 26, 2016 2:14 am

The department has also asked why there was a delay of five months in recommending the appeal, added the official.

The Delhi government is planning to challenge a decision by the Delhi High Court barring alternative medicine practitioners from practising allopathy or prescribing allopathic medicines.

A senior official said the matter has been referred to the law department, which has sought the opinion of the government counsel’s in the matter. The department has also asked why there was a delay of five months in recommending the appeal, added the official.

The department has decided to look into options for challenging the high court order, after it received representations from Ayush practitioners who have recently been under fire from the Delhi Medical Association on accusations of “illegally” administering allopathic medication.

“It is the case of the Ayush practitioners that they are taught modern medicine as a part of their Ayurveda curriculum and they are permitted to administer allopathic medicine as medical practitioners under the Delhi Bhartiya Chikitsa Parishad Act and rules,” said the department.

The High Court, in its judgment dated April 8, allowed the petition of the Delhi Medical Association to debar practitioners of the Indian system of medicine from practicing allopathic medicine.

Incidentally, the department of health and family welfare has said the HC order is “worthy of challenge”.

“The expressions used for describing the medicines to be administered by the members of the each register — Indian medical register and state medical register — are practically identical in their use of words and the import,” said the department in its argument.

It added, “The order of high court order is worthy of challenge on basis of existing legal provisions governing the practice of medicine in Delhi, and also because it comes into conflict with the order of the apex court in another case.”