Manmohan JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J.
1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of this Court's Division Bench order dated 10th November, 2010 passed in WP(C) 13208/2009.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that by way of W.P.(C) 13208/2009 they had moved this Court to enforce the recommendations of the Government-appointed Task Force on Medical Education under the National Rural Health Mission. According to the petitioners, the Task Force had provided a blue-print for a new course which would radically restructure the health system and was likely to remedy the chronic shortage of health care professionals in rural areas.
3. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Division Bench had disposed of the said writ petition vide order dated 10th November, 2010 based upon the undertakings given by the Central Government and Medical Council of India. According to him, this Court had given the Medical Council of India two months' time to finalize the curriculum and syllabi of the three and a half year Primary Healthcare Practitioner Course. Mr. Bhushan states a further period of two months was given to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for the enforcement of the same. Thus, he states, that the course ought to have been introduced by March, 2011 as per the timeline stipulated by the Court. He however, states that the course has not yet been notified.
4. Mr. Bhushan submits that Section 11(2) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (for short "IMC Act") gives power to the Central Government to recognise a qualification and notify the same in the official gazette. He submits that unless the same is done, the graduates of the said course would not be entitled to practice modern medicine for primary health care services. He submits that giving this case sound legal basis is an absolute must before the Central Universities, Central Institutions, State Governments and Universities can start the course.
5. Mr. Bhushan contends that the need for notifying the course under IMC Act is imperative, especially in view of the recent order passed by the Guwahati High Court in W.P. (C) 5785/2005 striking down a similar course introduced by the State of Assam on the ground that the said course had not been approved and notified by the Central Government under the IMC Act.
6. Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General states that Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in consultation with the Medical Council of India has introduced a short term course namely B.Sc. (Community Health) in the rural areas creating a cadre of mid-level health professionals exclusively to cater to the needs of rural health care.
7. Mr. Jain states that though the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare had recommended not to introduce B.Sc. (Community Health) course, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare did not accept the recommendation and sought the approval of the Cabinet and the Cabinet approved the proposal in its meeting held on 13th November, 2013.
8. Mr. Jain states that these graduates would be an integral part of the health care system and would support the health workforce at appropriate levels. He, however, admits that there is no Central Act which provides for the rights, duties and privileges of such proposed graduates.
9. Mr. Jain states that accordingly,........