Dr Sk Mohammed Ibrahim v. Union Of India And ORS.

CB 01 15.05.2025 d.p.

Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Port Blair Appellate Jurisdiction (From the Principal Bench) W.P.A No. 238 of 2025 Dr. Sk. Mohammed Ibrahim versus Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Phatick Chandra Das, ...For the Petitioner.

Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi, Mr. Ramendra Agarwal.

...For the Respondent Nos.2 to 8.

1.

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.

2.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 9th April, 2025 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (SA)/Chairman, Enforcement Committee, F.No. 5/DRA (SA)/DC/CERR (Pro & Rne. Cert.)/2021-22 directing the petitioner to immediately cease all clinical services until the clinic is duly renewed/registered under the Andaman & Nicobar Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Rules, 2013 and further instructing the petitioner not to engage in any irregularities in future. 3.

On a perusal of the impugned order it appears that the authority was of the opinion that the petitioner was running the clinical establishment without the proper authority of law.

4.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner relies upon the certificate of provisional

registration issued by the Government of Andaman & Nicobar Islands (UT) on 17th October, 2014 registering the clinic for providing medical services as a single practitioner clinic under Homoeopathy System of Medicine. The certificate was valid for a period of one year from the date of issue.

5.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that thereafter the registration certificate was not renewed by the authority despite representation/application being made for the same. 6.

Prayer has been made to permit the petitioner to continue with the Homoeopathy practice.

7.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the administration opposes the submission of the petitioner. 8.

It has been submitted that the petitioner does not have the proper qualification to practice Homoeopathy in the Islands. He does not have a Drug Licence. Neither does he have the registration under the Andaman & Nicobar Islands in terms of the Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010.

9.

Upon hearing of the parties it appears that, admittedly, the petitioner has not been able to produce any document to show that the petitioner possesses a valid Drug Licence or a valid Registration Certificate under the Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010.

10. All the documents relied upon by the petitioner in support of running the clinic appears to be outdated and none are valid on date.

11. Relying upon such documents which are not valid at present, the petitioner cannot be permitted to run the clinic. Hence, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

12. It will be open for the petitioner to renew practice only after he obtains all necessary licences,

registration certificate and proper degree in accordance with law.

13. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the prayer for issuance of Drug Licence is pending consideration before the authority. The authority shall consider the same in accordance with law.

14. The writ petition stands disposed of.

15.

All parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.

16.

Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties.

( Amrita Sinha, J )