Sunday, July 20, 2025

A Breach of Law and Justice: Condemning Statutory Overreach

 

This blog is a personal observation on what I consider a completely misplaced circular issued by a statutory body in Telangana, India. While it does not directly affect me or my professional work in another state, it has serious ramifications for my colleagues in Telangana and for the specialty of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) across the country.

The Telangana State Medical Council (TGMC) issued a Public Notice dated 26/06/2025 and a Circular to all universities and institutions dated 19/07/2025, directing that OMFS trainees should not be posted in plastic surgery departments—despite such postings being mandated in the curriculum. I do not wish to speculate on the motivations behind these notifications, but I can unequivocally state that they represent a violation of several established laws in the country.


1. Jurisdiction of Regulatory Bodies

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery is a dental surgical specialty and is governed by the Dental Council of India (DCI). In contrast, the National Medical Commission (NMC) and State Medical Councils like the TGMC regulate the practice of medicine by those holding an MBBS qualification.

India has multiple health systems—such as AYUSH, pharmacy, nursing, and dentistry—each regulated by its own statutory authority. The NMC is merely one among several such bodies under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. It has no legal jurisdiction over the DCI, nor does it hold a superior status. Therefore, TGMC’s claim that the DCI ought to have obtained the NMC’s consent before issuing curriculum guidelines is not only misinformed but reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of its own legal powers.


2. Defamatory and Misleading Tone

The tone and tenor of the TGMC public notice are not just condescending but also factually misleading. By undermining a well-recognized surgical specialty such as OMFS, the notice harms the professional standing of its practitioners. The act of issuing a public circular with false or misleading information opens the door to potential legal action under tort and criminal defamation.

In Business Standard and Anr vs Lohitaksha Shukla and Anr (Delhi High Court, March 22, 2021), the court recognized that class defamation—targeting a group—is equivalent to individual defamation. Hence, any affected individual or association has the locus standi to initiate civil or criminal proceedings.


3. Violation of Constitutional Rights

The TGMC’s directive infringes upon Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to practice any profession. OMFS surgeons are being denied their right to training and practice in a domain that is part of their officially mandated curriculum. This is not just a professional setback—it is a constitutional breach.


4. Violation of Competition L

There appears to be a protectionist motive behind this directive, possibly influenced by other specialties seeking to limit competition. This raises red flags under the Competition Act, 2002, particularly Sections 3 and 4, which address anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position. It is troubling that a statutory regulatory body is being used as a platform to further the interests of one professional group at the expense of another.


5. Undermining the OMFS Curriculum

The directive denies OMFS trainees access to plastic surgery postings, which are explicitly required in the MDS curriculum. This sets a dangerous precedent:

  • Can a state medical council arbitrarily remove postings in basic medical sciences from the OMFS curriculum?
  • Can it unilaterally block access to medicine or general surgery training?

These are not academic questions—they go to the heart of professional training and inter-disciplinary respect. The TGMC’s reasoning is both disingenuous and legally untenable.


Final thoughts

These observations are based on my understanding of the law and regulatory framework in medical and dental education. I acknowledge that I am not personally aggrieved by this notification and do not have locus standi to file a challenge. However, as a former National Secretary and President of AOMSI, I view this development with grave concern for the future of our specialty.

I trust that those directly affected—and the professional associations representing them—will take appropriate legal and institutional action to contest this breach.

While this content may be shared, I take personal responsibility only for what is published on my blog domain.

George Paul
MDS, DNB, LLB, Dip. Med Law & Ethics


Bottom of Form