CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 DEL CK 0374

Association Of Medical Biochemists Of India vs Medical Council Of India

Delhi High Court · Decided on 9 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajiv Shakdher, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 2158 Of 2018, Civil Miscellaneous No. 8918, 8919 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 312 words

Rajiv Shakdher, J

CM No.8918/2018

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 2158/2018 & CM No.8919/2018

2.

A limited relief, which, the petitioner seeks, presently, is the consideration of its representation dated 12.1.2018, addressed to the Medical Council of India (in short "MCI").

3.

Mr. Sibal, who appears for the petitioner says that MCI in his view has erroneously construed the order of the Supreme Court dated 12.12.2017, passed in SLP (C) No.28529/2010, tilted: North Gujarat Unit of Association of Self Employed Owners (Paramedical) of Private Pathology Laboratories of Gujarat vs. North Gujarat Pathologists Association & Ors.

4.

According to Mr. Sibal the issue which, inter alia, arose before the Supreme Court was whether laboratory technicians could sign the lab-reports as against registered medical practitioners who possess post graduate qualification in Pathology.

5.

Mr. Sibal's submission is that persons holding post graduate medical degree in other disciplines such as Biochemistry, Microbiology, Immunology and Haematology should also be permitted to sign the lab-reports.

6.

Mr. Sibal says that the petitioner association is concerned with those persons who have a basic MBBS degree along with post graduate degree in the aforementioned disciplines.

7.

Mr. Singhdev, who appears on advance notice, says that if so directed, MCI will consider the representation of the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, MCI is directed to consider the aforementioned representation of the petitioner association. Since, in support of its representation, the petitioner association also seeks to place reliance upon the assertions made in the writ petition, the assertions made therein will also be considered by the MCI. The MCI will pass a speaking order and, if necessary, hear the authorised representatives of the petitioner association.

9.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

10.

Needless to say, the aforementioned exercise will be carried out expeditiously, though, not later than eight weeks from today.

11.

Consequently, pending application shall stand closed.