Dr. Subhash Vijayran v. Bar Council Of Delhi And ANR

$~37 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 898/2019 DR. SUBHASH VIJAYRAN ..... Petitioner Through:

Petitioner in person.

versus BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr Preet Pal Singh and Mr Saurabh Sharma, Advocates for BCI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 28.01.2019 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the respondents to respond to a representation dated 05.11.2018, whereby he has sought permission to retain his name as a medical practitioner even after he is enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Delhi. 2.

The petitioner is a registered medical practitioner. The petitioner has completed his M.B.B.S., and his name was included in the State Medical Register.

The petitioner was also issued a certificate of registration dated 01.10.2015.

However, the petitioner is interested in practising the profession of law and, therefore, has enrolled as a student with the Campus Law Centre. The petitioner would complete his course by mid of this year, and he expects to be enrolled as an advocate by

September, 2019.

3.

The petitioner is aware that he would not be permitted to practice the profession of being a medical doctor as well as an advocate simultaneously. He has also pointed out that the said issue is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa: 1996 SCC (3) 342. He, however, states that his case is different since he is not seeking a license to practice medicine in general but only seeks to retain the same in order to treat his parents and immediate family members. He states that is willing to give an undertaking that he will not provide treatment to any other person. He prays that in the aforesaid circumstances, he may be allowed to retain his medical license even while practising as an advocate. 4.

This Court is not persuaded to accept to the above. The question is not as to whom the petitioner desires to treat but whether he is entitled to practice medicine while practicing as an Advocate. Clearly this issue is decided in the case of Dr Haniraj L. Chulani (supra). If the petitioner is not entitled to dispense treatment to any person, there is no reason why an exception should be made to allow to him to dispense treatment to his relatives.

5.

The petition is unmerited and is, accordingly, dismissed. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 28, 2019 MK