The Karnataka High Court recently emphasized the importance of preventing unqualified individuals from providing medical services and deceiving underprivileged individuals in rural areas.

Justice M Nagaprasanna's remark came while rejecting a plea from a paramedical practitioner (petitioner) who was seeking registration for a medical clinic that he operated.

The Court expressed astonishment at the petitioner's prolonged self-identification as a practicing "doctor" despite possessing only a Community Medical Service and Essential Drugs (CMS-ED) diploma. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the urgency of halting the practice of unqualified individuals providing medical services.

The petitioner approached the High Court after facing refusal from Karnataka's state authorities to obtain registration for operating a medical clinic. The denial of a registration certificate under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act, 2007 prompted the petitioner to seek relief from the High Court due to feeling aggrieved by this decision. During the proceedings, the petitioner mentioned having pursued para-medical studies and asserted to have been "practicing as a doctor" at his clinic for an extended period.

The petitioner detailed having completed a CMS-ED paramedical course in Delhi, accredited by the Central Board of Paramedical Education in Mumbai, operating under World Health Organization guidelines. Utilizing this certification, the petitioner established a clinic in Bangarapet and delivered medical services for an extended duration. During this period, the Karnataka government enforced the Karnataka Private Medical Institutions Act, 2007, effective January 23, 2008.

The Act mandated that the provision of medical services could only continue upon applying for and obtaining registration for operating private medical establishments. Despite meeting the criteria, the petitioner was denied registration. Subsequently, the petitioner contested this refusal before the High Court.

Upon reviewing the records, the Court determined that the petitioner's para-medical qualification did not grant him the right to assert himself as a "private medical practitioner" or a "doctor" according to the 2007 Act. Consequently, the Court concluded that he was not eligible for registration under the provisions of the Act.

The Court additionally raised concerns about the petitioner's extended practice despite lacking the necessary qualifications. There were indications that the petitioner had been practicing for a considerable duration and might have even engaged in prescribing medicines despite lacking the appropriate qualifications.