Prescribing Allopathic Medicines Without Qualification Is Deficiency In Service: NCDRC Awards ₹2 Lakh For Vision Loss
Pranav B Prem
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, comprising Dr. Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member) and Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain (Member), has held that prescribing allopathic medicines without a recognised medical qualification constitutes deficiency in service and negligence by operation of law. The Commission set aside the orders of the fora below and directed payment of ₹2 lakh compensation to the complainant who lost vision in one eye following treatment at an optical centre.
The revision petition was filed by Rakesh Kumar Shukla challenging the orders of the District Consumer Forum and the State Commission, which had dismissed his complaint. According to the complainant, his left eye turned red on 9 June 2010, and the following day he visited Alok Eye Health and Optical Centre for treatment. The respondent examined the eye, administered oral medicines and eye drops, issued a handwritten prescription, and received ₹500 as consultation charges.
However, the complainant’s condition worsened and developed into a severe infection. He subsequently consulted eye specialists in Bahraich and Delhi, and was later admitted to Dr. Rajendra Prasad Eye Centre, New Delhi, for advanced treatment. Despite medical intervention, the vision in his left eye was permanently lost, and he incurred treatment expenses of approximately ₹2 lakh.
Aggrieved, the complainant filed a consumer complaint seeking compensation. The District Forum dismissed the complaint on the ground that payment of consideration had not been proved, and therefore the complainant was not a consumer. The State Commission upheld the dismissal, though it accepted the complainant’s affidavit as proof of payment. The respondent did not appear before the National Commission and was proceeded ex parte.
The NCDRC observed that the District Forum had committed a serious error by dismissing the complaint solely on the preliminary ground of maintainability without adjudicating the substantive issues, including the legality of prescription by an unqualified person, medical negligence, and the loss of vision suffered by the complainant. It noted that once the State Commission accepted proof of payment and recognised the complainant as a consumer, the matter ought to have been adjudicated on merits.
The Commission further held that the State Commission’s finding that a diploma holder could prescribe allopathic medicines was contrary to statutory provisions and binding Supreme Court precedent. It observed that the practice of modern medicine is governed by central legislation, including the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, now succeeded by the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, which permits practice and prescription only by persons possessing recognised medical qualifications and registration.
Referring to the Supreme Court decision in Baharul Islam v. Indian Medical Association, the Commission noted that diploma holders or persons without recognised medical qualifications are not entitled to practise or prescribe allopathic medicines. It held that prescribing such medicines without statutory authority itself amounts to deficiency in service and negligence by operation of law, irrespective of the outcome of the treatment.
In the present case, the Commission found that the respondent, who did not possess a recognised medical qualification, had prescribed allopathic medicines to the complainant. It held that the injury suffered by the complainant was a direct consequence of such illegal practice.
Accordingly, the Commission set aside the impugned order of the State Commission and allowed the revision petition. It directed the respondent to pay ₹2,00,000 as compensation to the complainant, along with simple interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint until realisation, and ₹20,000 towards litigation costs.
Cause Title: Rakesh Kumar Shukla v. Alok Eye Health and Optical Centre
Case No: Revision Petition No. NC/RP/574/2025
Coram: Dr. Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member) and Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain (Member)
