Dr. N. Sukumaran v. The Travancore Cochin Medical Council
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/26TH SRAVANA, 1937 RP.No. 694 of 2015 () IN WA.1979/2014 --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WA 1979/2014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 20-05-2015 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 31720/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 11/7/2014 PETITIONER/APPELLANT:
------------------------------------ DR. N. SUKUMARAN SREEPADMAM, KURUPPANKULANGARA.P.O, CHERTHALA ALAPPUZHA-688551.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.BABU RAJAN SRI.K.JALADHARAN SRI.T.A.SREE KUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------------------------
1. THE TRAVANCORE COCHIN MEDICAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, RED-CROSS ROAD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035.
2. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110001.
3. THE CENTRAL COUNCIL OF HOMEOPATHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, NEW DELHI-110001.
4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISRY OF HEALTH THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695035.
BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS BY SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J.
& A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
================ R.P.No.694 of 2015 in WA No.1979 of 2014 ================ Dated this, the 17th day of August, 2015
O R D E R
Shaffique, J.
This review petition is filed challenging judgment dated 20/5/2015 inter alia contending that there is error of law apparent on the face of record. It is contended by the petitioner that this Court has not taken into consideration, the scope and effect of Section 47 of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act. In fact, in para 9 of the judgment, this Court has considered the matter and observed that the experience gained by the petitioner as reflected in the documents produced by him do not satisfy the conditions for grant of registration and that it is not possible for the Council to take any different view in the matter. We have observed that Section 47 does not apply to the facts of the case. Petitioner further raised certain grounds which have already been raised and the relevant particulars had already been decided in
R.P.No.694 of 2015 in WA No.1979 of 2014 -:2:- the judgment.
We do not find that any of the grounds referred to in the review petition warrant review of the judgment as there is no error apparent on the face of record. The attempt of the petitioner is for a rehearing of the entire matter. We do not think that a rehearing is contemplated by way of a review. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PS to Judge