K.A.Jabir Binu vs ‘Medical Council Of India’ on 22 February, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5557 of 2010(T)


1. K.A.JABIR BINU, AGED 31 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. K.K.ABDUL AZEEZ,

                        Vs



1. 'MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA',
                       ...       Respondent

2. REGISTRAR,MAHARASHTRA MEDICAL COUNCIL,

3. DR.NAZEER Y FULARA, FULARA MEDI CHECK

4. 'RIYA TRAVELS & TOURS (INDIA) PVT LTD',

5. 'NON RESIDENT KERALITES' AFFAIRS

6. PRAVASHI MALAYALI WELFARE ASSOCIATIO

7. MINISTRY OF OVERSEAS AFFAIRS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJAN MANNALI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :22/02/2010

 O R D E R
                 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

              ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                      W.P.(C) No. 5557 of 2010 T
              ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
              Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2010

                             J U D G M E N T

The petitioner seeks for a direction to respondents 1

and 2 to conduct disciplinary proceedings against the third

respondent and to punish the third respondent if he is found guilty

for the glaring illegalities and foul play committed by him. The

petitioner has narrated details of the various acts and omissions of

the third respondent in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the writ petition. The

third respondent is a medical practitioner stationed in Mumbai.

The petitioner was in Kuwait and he came back to Mumbai in 2006

for changing Visa. He had contacted the third respondent for

arranging a medical report, through a travel agency.

After going through the averments in paragraphs 4 and 5, I

am of the view that the petitioner’s remedy is to approach the

Mumbai High Court. No part of the cause of action has arisen

within the jurisdiction of this Court. The third respondent is not

residing or carrying out his activities within the jurisdiction of this

Court. In the light of the various decisions of this Court including

that of a Full Bench in Nakul Deo Singh Vs. Deputy Commandant

WPC.5557/2010
: 2 :

[1999 (3) KLT 629 FB], I am of the view that the writ petition cannot

be maintained before this Court for want of territorial jurisdiction.

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to move before

the appropriate court.

(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
aks