Our CorrespondentLudhiana, April 4
Despite stiff opposition from the Central Council of Homoeopathy (CCH), the Council of Homoeopathy System of Medicine (CHSM), Punjab, has announced its decision to award honorary degrees to the candidates who secured the diploma before 1983 or took admission for the diploma course before 1983. This decision was taken at a meeting of the Board of Studies here today.
It may be mentioned here that the CHSM, Punjab, had invited the applications from the candidates who had done the DHMS before 1983 through advertisements issued on March 19, 2001, in different newspapers. Three hundred doctors have so far applied for grant of honorary diplomas, according to the council spokespersons.
The decision of the Punjab council has led to a lot of resentment among those pursuing the bachelors degree. The Central council has also issued a “caution notice” terming the action of the state council as illegal.
The members of the council, while addressing a press conference after their meeting, said there should be no confrontation regarding awarding of honorary degrees as the CHSM was already given this power under Section 21(a) of Homoeopathic Practitioners Act, 1965.
Dr Bhupinder Singh, Chairman, CHSM, said in reference to the letter of the CCH addressed to the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, on March 13, 1990, it was conveyed through the Director, ISM, Government of India, to all health secretaries, directors of the ISM and homoeopathy in states and union territories that the Government of India had accepted the recommendations received from the CCH and there will be no disparity in the pay scales among the physicians of different system of medicines.
The chairman made it clear that CHSM was only implementing the decision taken by the CCH according to the above orders.
The board members alleged that Dr Lalit Verma, Secretary, CCH, New Delhi, had issued a caution notice on April 2, 2001, in an English newspaper which warned the general public not to opt for such an ‘illegal’ degree. They also said that Dr Verma without considering the letters issued on March 1990, January 1991 and June 1992 had violated the provisions of the CCH of 1973 Rules and Regulations there under.
The CHSM members said that the decision of awarding degrees to the diploma holders was not amended, withdrawn or challenged in any court of law for any reason. Dr Bhupinder Singh said the caution notice issued by Dr Lalit Verma had encroached upon the legal rights and disturbed the functioning of the state Council.
Dr Tejinder Pal Singh, another member of the board, said the caution notice issued on April 2, 2001, was without any jurisdiction and in individual capacity and the same was without any authority because no reference of meeting the CCH had given authority to Dr Lalit Verma for issuing of such a notice.
It may be mentioned that the matter is already pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the form of a writ. A division bench of the High Court comprising of Mr Justice N.K. Sood and Mr Justice J.L. Gupta have directed that any decision of the state council would be subject to the final decision of the writ.
