The Kerala High Court recently observed that physiotherapists and occupational therapists can also use the prefix "Dr" (short for doctor) in their names, and that modern medical practitioners cannot stake an exclusive claim over the title "Doctor." [Indian Association of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation v Union of India and connected cases].
Justice VG Arun (now retired) made the observation while dismissing a batch of petitions by the Indian Medical Association and several doctors in the matter.
The petitioners had challenged provisions of the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act, 2021 (NCAHP Act) and certain curricula which accorded the status of doctor to physiotherapists and occupational therapists, and allowed them to use the prefix 'Dr' with their names.
"The contention that the title 'Doctor' exclusively belongs to medical professionals is a misconception since even now, like in the olden times, persons with higher educational qualifications like PhD are entitled to use the title 'Doctor,'" the Court held.
Earlier, the Court had passed an interim order restraining physiotherapists and occupational therapists from using the prefix.
This was after the Court found that a prima facie conflict existed between the Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916, which penalised the false assumption or use of medical titles, and the Competency-Based Curriculums for Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy (2025), which allowed physiotherapists and occupational therapists to use the prefix 'Dr'.
In its final verdict, the Court noted that the provisions relating to misuse of medical titles had since been repealed and current medical statutes did not contain any similar restrictions.
The petitions before the Court argued that physiotherapists and occupational therapists cannot use the "Dr." prefix.
The petitioners contended that these professionals merely provide supportive services that cannot be equated with the services of qualified medical practitioners registered under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (NMC Act).
They sought directions to prevent physiotherapists and occupational therapists from claiming themselves to be first contact healthcare providers and from using the prefix 'Dr.' in their names along with suffixes such as 'PT' and 'OT.'
The Court noted that the term "doctor" originally referred to learned teachers and scholars and only later became commonly associated with medical professionals. Even today, holders of doctoral degrees outside medicine are entitled to use the title before their names, the Court pointed out.
The Court closely examined the scheme of the NCAHP Act, which was enacted to regulate and formally recognise allied healthcare professionals like physiotherapists and occupational therapists as independent healthcare providers within their specialised domains.
It noted that while such professionals could offer therapeutic and rehabilitative services, their role remained distinct from that of a medical practitioner, as they were not authorised to prescribe medicines or provide allopathic treatment.
The Court further observed that there was no conflict between the NCAHP Act and the NMC Act as claimed by the petitioners.
Both statutes operated in separate domains, the Court noted. It also took note of Section 64 of the NCAHP Act, which contains an overriding clause giving it precedence in matters concerning allied healthcare professionals.
In view of this, the Court held that it would be inappropriate for it to interfere with the provisions of the Act merely because a section of professionals disagreed with the regulatory framework.
"This Court is unable to find any compelling reason to read down the provisions of the NCAHP Act, so as to confine the scope of discharge of professional services by Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists as a supporting group for the qualified medical professionals registered under the NMC Act," the Court said.
On the issue of using the prefix 'Dr', the Court observed that neither the NMC Act nor the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act granted medical professionals the right to exclusively use the title 'Doctor.'
Therefore, it concluded that physiotherapists and occupational therapists cannot be restrained from using the prefix 'Dr' with their names, and dismissed petitions seeking such action.
"The NMC Act does not contain any provision for conferring the title Doctor on qualified medical professionals. The expression 'title' used in Section 40 of the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act cannot therefore be understood as statutorily entitling the qualified medical professionals to prefix 'Dr' to their names. In the absence of such provision, the petitioners cannot claim exclusive right to use the prefix 'Dr;" the Court held.
Senior counsel Mayankutty Mather and VV Asokan along with advocates S Parvathi, TK Sreekala, Nikitha Susan Paulson, Uthara Asokan and KG Anil appeared for the petitioners.
Senior counsel S Sreekumar, George Poonthottam and PB Krishnan, along with advocates V Ramkumar Nambiar and Vineeth Komalachandran appeared for the respondents.
Standing counsel KS Premjith Kumar appeared for the National Medical Commission.
Deputy Solicitor General of India OM Shalina appeared for the Union of India.
Central government counsel Mahadev MJ represented the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions.
[Read Order]