| Headnote |
Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004 – Constitutionality of – Legislative Competency of the State – Assam State legislature enacted the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004 – Said Act provides for the establishment of a regulatory authority to register the Diploma holders and to regulate their practice – State Act in conflict with Central Act (Indian Medical Council Act, 1956) – Writ Petition challenging the Constitutionality of the Act – High Court allowed the Writ petition by holding that the Act, 2004 was unconstitutional as the State Act was in conflict with the Central Act – High Court observed that the power and scope of the State to legislate under Entry 25 of List III of the Seventh Schedule is very limited and is only in respect of a field unoccupied by a Central Act – Held: Prescription of minimum standards for medical education, authority to recognise or de-recognise an institution etc., are areas over which exclusive legislative competence lies with the Parliament, under Entry 66 of List I – The State Legislatures, on the other hand, under Entry 25 of List III, possess legislative competence to legislate with respect to all other aspects of education, except determination of minimum standards and co-ordination – In view of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004, declared to be null and void as State Legislature not having the legislative competence to enact the said Law – The State Legislature has no legislative competence to enact a law which is in conflict with the law setting the standards of medical education in the context of modern medicine or allopathic medicine, which has been determined by Parliamentary Legislation as well as the Rules – Constitution of India – Seventh Schedule – List I, Entry 66 and List III, Entry 25. Assam Community Professionals (Registration and Competency) Act, 2015 – Constitutionality of – Power of Legislature – To overrule a Judicial Decision – High Court vide the impugned order allowed Writ petition holding that the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004 enacted by the State legislature was unconstitutional as the Act was in conflict with the Central Act (Indian Medical Council Act, 1956) and State Legislature not having the legislative competence to enact the said Law – Meanwhile, the State passed the Assam Community Professionals (Registration and Competency) Act, 2015 – Held: The Legislature cannot directly overrule a judicial decision – But when a competent Legislature retrospectively removes the substratum or foundation of a judgment to make the decision ineffective, the said exercise is a valid legislative exercise provided it does not transgress on any other constitutional limitation – The power of the sovereign legislature to legislate within its field, both prospectively and retrospectively cannot be questioned – It would be permissible for the legislature to remove a defect in earlier legislation pointed out by a constitutional court in exercise of its powers by way of judicial review – The Assam Community Professionals (Registration and Competency) Act, 2015, enacted pursuant to the judgment of the High Court, is a valid piece of Legislation as it removed the basis of the impugned judgment passed by the High Court – The 2015 Act is also not in conflict with the IMC, Act, 1956 – This is because the Central Act namely, IMC, Act, 1956 does not deal with Community Health Professionals who would practise as allopathic practitioners in the manner as they were permitted to practise under the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004, in rural areas of the State of Assam – Hence, by a separate legislation the Community Health Professionals have been permitted to practise as such professionals – The said legislation of 2015 is not in conflict with IMC, Act, 1956 and the rules and regulations made thereunder – Hence, the Act of 2015 is not hit by Entry 66 of List I of the Constitution and is within the legislative competence of the State Legislature under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Constitution of India: Seventh Schedule – Art. 245, 246 & 254 – Interplay between Entry 66 of List I and Entry 25 of List III – Held: The question of invasion into another legislative territory has to be determined by substance and not by degree – Where one Entry is made ‘subject to’ another Entry, all that it means is that out of the scope of the former Entry, a field of legislation covered by the latter Entry has been reserved to be specially dealt with by the appropriate Legislature – The field of legislation covered under Entry 25 of List III is subject to Entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List I – Dual restrictions operate in the legislative competence of a State Legislature to enact any law under Entry 25 of List III – First is, if such a law is to be made by the State Legislature, it is always subject to Entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List I or the Union List, in respect of which only the Parliament has the power to enact a law – The second restriction is with regard to the subject of the Entry as a whole – When any law is made under Entry 25 of List III by a State Legislature, the same is always subject to Entry 66 of List I – Modern scientific medicine or allopathic medicine is within the scope of Entry 66 of List I and not under Entry 25 of List III – In the instant case the law made by the State Legislature is hit by the first of the aforesaid two restrictions – Hence, the State Legislature lacked the legislative competence to enact such a Law. |
