The Allahabad High Court has ruled that although the practice of electro-homeopathy is not prohibited in Uttar Pradesh, such electro-homeopathic practitioners cannot use the prefix ‘doctor’ before their names. Did.
The bench is made up of Judge Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Om Prakash Shukla It further stated that this practice complies with a government order dated November 25, 2003. said,
“Although there is no institution that can award degrees or diplomas in electro-homeopathy, the petitioner may at any time practice electro-homeopathy as an alternative therapy within the ambit of the order dated November 25, 2003, as there is no prohibition. This Court also observed that in the absence of any statutory provision, no diploma or degree in electropathy or electrohomeopathy can be awarded in India, but there is no impediment to the issuance of certificates for such studies.”
factual background
The petitioner had obtained a certificate from the Count Mattei Society to practice the electro-homeopathic system of medicine. By virtue of this certificate, the petitioner was allowed to practice electro-homeopathy in Punjab, Delhi, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Kerala and other states, but not in Uttar Pradesh. They were not allowed to practice the same as there was no law regarding it. same. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking permission to practice electro-her homeopathy in UP.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order dated June 21, 2011 issued by the Government of India and the order dated November 25, 2003 regarding the practice, education and research of alternative medical systems such as electropathy, electro-homeopathy etc. He claimed that he had made it clear that it was an instruction. The order dated June 21, 2011 states that there is no legal impediment to awarding education in electro-his homeopathy unless a degree/diploma is awarded/issued for that course and such person The condition was that “doctor” could not be used as a prefix to a name.
Further, reliance is also placed on the Office Memorandum dated April 13, 2023, which states that only the Government of India has the power to make rules/regulations for the practice, education, development and promotion of Electro-Homeopathy. It is being It was submitted that since such power is reserved by the Central Government, the State Government cannot act in violation thereof and impede the practice of the petitioners.
High Court verdict
The court held as follows:The right to make rules and regulations for the practice of electropathy, including electrohomeopathy, is given to the central government” The court held that there is no council established to regulate electropathy and electro-homeopathy in this country and only occasional government orders are issued to regulate electropathy and electro-homeopathy. he admitted.
In terms of the government order dated November 25, 2003, the court observed that the electropathic/electro-homeopathic system of medicines system was not recommended as an alternative medicines system. Directions have been issued to all State/Union Territory Governments to inform and ensure that no government authority will award degrees or diplomas for practicing electropathy/electro homeopathy. Additionally, such practitioners were not to use “physician” as a prefix to their names. The court recognized that practicing alternative treatments is not prohibited.
Further, the court referred to the order dated May 5, 2010 of the Department of Health Research, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, suspending the practice and provision of education in electropathy for as long as the order dated November 25, 2010 exists. He said that he had made it clear that there was no proposal to do so. It continued in 2003.
Subsequently, following the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, Electro-Homeo Medical Association of India vs. UP etc.A government order dated June 21, 2011 was issued, and orders dated November 25, 2003 and May 5, 2010 were issued to provide for the education, practice and research of alternative medical systems such as electropathy and electro-homeopathy. It has been clarified that it is treated as an instruction in the field.
The court also Sutapa Singh vs. U.P. etc. In this case, the Supreme Court granted permission to the petitioner to practice electro homeopathy and held that such practice and imparting of education must be done in accordance with the government order dated November 25, 2003.
Accordingly, the court held that the petitioner in UP can practice electro-homeopathy unless prohibited by the competent authority. However, the court restrained the petitioner from using the prefix “doctor” before his name.
Case title: Rajesh Kumar S/O Ram Kelawan Singh and Ann. v. Union of India through Secy.Ministry of Health and Family Welfare [WRIT – C No. – 6856 of 2009]
Click here to read/download order
