In which of the following case the Supreme Court of India while interpreting the scope of Rule 2(ee)…
The interpretation comes from Dr. Mukhtiar Chand v. State of Punjab. The Court treated rule 2(ee)(iii) as covering practitioners entered in a State medical register, outside…
Choose your answer
In which of the following case the Supreme Court of India while interpreting the scope of Rule 2(ee) (iii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 held that the said rule “covers practitioners enrolled in Medical Register of a State who, though not covered by clauses (i) and (ii), are de facto practising modern system of medicine (allopathic). It does not cover left-out qualified allopathic doctors.”
Answer and explanation
Correct answer A
The interpretation comes from Dr. Mukhtiar Chand v. State of Punjab. The Court treated rule 2(ee)(iii) as covering practitioners entered in a State medical register, outside the first two categories, whose practice of modern medicine is recognised by a State Government declaration. The clause serves the Drugs Act and rules; it is not a residual category for qualified allopathic doctors already covered by the earlier clauses or an unrestricted authorisation to practise every system of medicine.
Practice for these exams
-
Gujarat Legal Officer (Drugs)