Allahabad High Court Refuses Plea To Declare Degree Of Physiotherapy As Equivalent To MBBS For Food Safety Officer Recruitment
The Allahabad Excessive Court docket lately dismissed a petition in search of a route to think about diploma in Physiotherapy as a qualification at par with graduate bachelors diploma in drugs.
The Excessive Court docket thought of the query whether or not qualification of the Petitioner as bachelor in Physiotherapy, decree of which has been conferred by the State Integral College, Lucknow quantities to a level in drugs/medical science.
The Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar noticed, “Thus it’s both for the State Authorities to acknowledge such diploma of Physiotherapy as equal to the bachelor’s diploma in drugs or for Medical Council of India to acknowledge course of Physiotherapy as of medication and except and till State Authorities acknowledges so or the appointing authority admits such diploma to be diploma required underneath the Service Guidelines as an instructional qualification, this Court docket won’t direct the authority to think about diploma in query as a qualification at par with graduate bachelors diploma in drugs as required underneath the related Service Guidelines.”
Advocate Satya Prakash Pandey represented the Petitioner, whereas Advocate Ajay Kumar represented the Respondent.
Case Temporary
The Petitioner appeared and cleared the written examination held by the Public Service Fee for the put up of Meals Security Officer in 2014. Later, the Petitioner was denied to seem within the interview on the bottom that the Petitioner didn’t possess a bachelor’s diploma in drugs.
The Petitioner contended that Integral College of Lucknow was a acknowledged college by the College-Grants-Fee and therefore programs performed by College together with the bachelor in Physiotherapy, which was a 4 years course, have been additionally taken to be acknowledged one.
Nonetheless, it was argued {that a} diploma in drugs means diploma acknowledged underneath the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and solely an MBBS diploma is acknowledged underneath the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956.
Court docket’s Evaluation
The Allahabad Excessive Court docket noticed that to resolve the query whether or not a level in Physiotherapy is equal to diploma in Drugs would fall exterior the scope of jurisdiction of this Court docket underneath Article 226 of the Structure.
“Thus, info given to the Public Service Fee clearly offered that solely these confer diploma however a level on this topic Medical Science course can be conferred solely within the occasion such a course in acknowledged by Medical Council of India as per parameters laid down by it and the establishment like such Universities have been permitted to run programs by it. The query whether or not the phrase ‘drugs’ would come with Physiotherapy or not, and even when Medical Council of India is silent, contemplating the definition given underneath Part 2-f of the Medical Council Act, 1956, if diploma claimed as at par with drugs if that’s the case held, in my thought of view, this may quantity an act of holding a specific diploma equal to diploma required underneath the Service Guidelines, which actually fall exterior the scope of jurisdiction of this Court docket underneath Article 226 of the Structure”, the Court docket held.
Additional, the Court docket emphasised that the Medical Council of India is the final word statutory physique, which acknowledges programs of Medical Science, and subsequently, in absence of recognition of a course to award diploma within the topic of Medical Science, which can embody Physiotherapy, Petitioner’s qualification, can’t be stated to be a requisite qualification underneath the Service Recruitment Guidelines, 2012.
“In view of the above, subsequently, I maintain that the diploma possessed by the petitioner, being bachelor in Physiotherapy, shouldn’t be a level of bachelor in drugs, a requisite tutorial qualification underneath Service Recruitment Guidelines , 2012”, the Court docket noticed.
Accordingly, the Petition was dismissed.
Trigger Title: Sandhya Yadav V. State of U.P. (Impartial Quotation No. – 2025:AHC:105348)
Look:
Petitioner: Advocate Satya Prakash Pandey
Respondent: Advocates Ajay Kumar, Nisheeth Yadav, and Nishith Yadav
