Delhi HC asks Centre to reply on plea challenging appointment of president of medical assesement, rating board for NCISM

·2-min read
Representative image
Representative image

New Delhi [India], September 28 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has asked the Centre and others to file a reply on plea challenging the appointment of the president of the medical assessment and rating board for the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM).

The petitioner has sought to call the entire record of the selection process of the President of the accreditation Board of the NCISM under the impugned notification dated June 9, 2021.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh asked the Centre, NCISM and others to file a reply on the plea and listed the matter for November 28 for further hearing.

The Court was hearing a petition filed by Raghunandan Sharma through advocate Ashok Kumar Panigarhi and Gautam Kumar Laha.

Sharma, an ayurvedic doctor and former President of erstwhile CCIM, has challenged the appointment of Raghuram Bhatt as the President of the medical assessment and rating board for the Indian system of Medicine.

The Medical Assessment and Rating Board for the Indian system of Medicine constitutes of a President and eight members and the board is responsible to keep the standard of Medical Education in the Indian system of medicine.

The petitioner claimed that Bhatt despite having not any administrative experience in any premier private, semi govt or govt sector, has been selected as President of the Medical Assessment and Rating Board for the Indian system of Medicine of the newly established National Commission.

"By this, an incompetent person has been given the responsibility to control the entire AYUSH education of this country and abroad as a President of the Medical Assessment and Rating Board. As such, the very

the selection process is under cloud with respect to its competency," the petitioner said.

He called the entire selection biased and arbitrary and tainted with prior collusion in the absence of transparency.

The petitioner has sought to quash the appointment of the Respondent number 3 (Bhatt) being a disqualified candidate as per the prescribed qualification under the relevant act. (ANI)

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting