Medical fraternity under the flag of IMA has to work seriously...

Indian medical association has plenty of work to do in coming months.

under the able visionary leadership of Dr.N.Appa rao,IMA  has chalked plans to oppose the retrograde move of GOI,which non chalantly going to enable the AYUSH practitioners to prescribe modern medicines.

we have to fight using all platforms-legal,political and social.

our weapons:

"That no person other than those possessing qualifications mentioned in First, Second and Third Schedule of Indian Medical Council Act 1956 and registered with State Medical Register under the provisions of Indian Medical Council Act 1956 can practice allopathic or the modern scientific system of medicine anywhere in India".

1.supreme court never oppose the IMC Act &  indian medical degrees act.

2.Apex court in Mukhtiar Chand Vs. State of Punjab (AIR 19999 SC 468),proclaims,if GOI wants to empower AYUSH doctors to prescribe modern medicines,first of all, they have to be enrolled in STATE MEDICAL REGISTERS.

"As per this judgment, to prescribe modern medicines,qualification in Modern Scientific System of medicine is not necessary. just enrollment in state medical register and declaration by state govt are enough.

But,Supreme Court states, that clause 2(ee)iii of drugs act is not repugnant to Medical Council Act 1956.

As per Sub-section (2) of section 15, which was inserted in the 1956 Act, with effect from 15.9.1964 which, inter-alia, provides that no person other than a medical practitioner enrolled on “State Medical Register” shall practice modern scientific medicine in any State. so, the right of non-allopathic doctors to prescribe modern drugs by virtue of the declaration, issued under the said Drug rules by implication, got obliterated.”

While reading the below passage, plz observe the difference in two councils.one is modern medicine act (blue font) and the other is indian traditional medicine act (red font) .

• Hon’ble Supreme Court has ruled in Mukhtiar Chand Vs. State of Punjab (AIR 19999 SC 468) that “A harmonious reading of Section 15 of 1956 Act (Indian Medical Council Act) and section 17 of 1970 Act (Indian Medicine Council Act) leads to the conclusion that there is no scope for a person enrolled on the State Register of Indian Medicine or Central Register of Indian Medicine to practice modern scientific medicine in any of its branches unless that person is also enrolled on a State Medical Register within the meaning of 1956 Act.” 

• In another case titled Poonam Verma Vs. Aswin Paatel (AIR 1996 SC 2111), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given a definition of a quack a “A person who does not have knowledge of a particular system of medicine but practices in that system is a Quack and a mere pretender to medical knowledge or to put it differently a chariatan.” 
• The same was reaffirmed by Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3541 of2002  in Martin E D’Souza vs Mohd Ishfaq and it was held that “a professional maybe held liable for negligence on the ground that he did not possessed of the requisite skill which he professes to have, thus a doctor who has qualification in Ayurvedic, Unani or homeopathic medicine will be liable if he prescribes allopathic treatment

3.as per IMC Act,Indian medical degrees act, state physician practitioners act, no crosspathy practise is allowed.

4.under Drug and Cosmetic Rules, notifications under 2(cc)iii & Cosmetic Rules 45 and Section 2(ee) (iii) of drug rules as effected from 14-5-1960, which appear to allow practitioners of Indian Medicine to practice Modern Medicine. But, no one can get benefit of Section 2(ee) (iii), as none has been registered in State Medical Register after 1956 Act of MCI.

Dear members,plz appraise the media and other intellectual groups to oppose this backward move of GOI.