Andhra allows surgeries by Ayurvedic doctors: Why the IMA is pushing back

The Andhra Pradesh government has approved a policy allowing qualified postgraduate Ayurvedic doctors to independently perform select surgical procedures in the state. The decision has triggered strong opposition from the Indian Medical Association (IMA), which has raised concerns over patient safety, medical training standards and the legal validity of the move, particularly as the issue remains pending before the Supreme Court.

On December 23, Andhra Pradesh Health Minister Satya Kumar Yadav gave the nod to a policy permitting Ayurvedic doctors who have completed postgraduate training in surgical disciplines to independently carry out certain surgeries.

According to the state government, the decision aligns with existing national regulations under the Indian Medicine Central Council (IMCC) Regulations, 2020, and guidelines issued by the National Commission for Indian Systems of Medicine (NCISM).

Under the policy, eligible Ayurvedic practitioners can perform up to 58 procedures, including 39 under Shalya Tantra (general surgery) and 19 under Shalakya Tantra (ENT and ophthalmology). These include wound suturing, treatment of piles and fissures, excision of cysts and tumours, skin grafting, cataract procedures, and removal of accident-damaged tissue.

Why has the Indian Medical Association reacted so strongly?

The IMA, India’s largest voluntary organisation representing doctors of the modern scientific medicine system, has termed the move “misleading and unscientific” and warned that it could place patient safety at serious risk.

The association argues that surgery is not merely a technical skill that can be added through limited training. It is a complex medical discipline requiring years of structured, supervised and standardised education, which, according to the IMA, is imparted only through the MBBS and MS or MCh pathways regulated by the National Medical Commission.

From detailed anatomy and physiology to anaesthesia, perioperative care and complication management, the IMA says these competencies are integral to modern surgical training and cannot be partially replicated through alternative curricula.

IMA President Dr Dilip P Bhanushali has said that Ayurveda and Homoeopathy have their own scientific frameworks and should be promoted in their original forms. The concern, he says, is about “mixopathy”, or the blending of distinct medical systems without equivalent training, accreditation or evidence-based safeguards.

According to the IMA, such mixing dilutes educational standards, blurs accountability and creates grey zones in patient care, especially in high-risk areas such as surgery.

What patient safety concerns is the IMA raising?

The association has repeatedly flagged concerns related to the use of allopathic anaesthesia, management of surgical complications and emergency decision-making during operations. These, it argues, require extensive hands-on exposure within modern medicine settings, which Ayurvedic curricula, even at postgraduate levels, are not designed to provide in full.

From the IMA’s perspective, allowing cross-practice without equivalent training is neither evidence-based nor ethically justified, particularly when surgical outcomes can become life-threatening within minutes.

Why does the Supreme Court case matter here?

The issue of permitting Indian systems of medicine practitioners to perform surgeries is currently sub judice before the Supreme Court. A Public Interest Litigation filed in 2020 challenges the Central Council of Indian Medicine notification that allows postgraduate Ayurveda students to be trained in surgical procedures.

The matter is listed for hearing on January 8, 2026.

The IMA argues that issuing policy approvals while the issue is under judicial consideration is legally untenable and amounts to prejudging the court’s decision. It has formally urged the Andhra Pradesh government to withdraw the policy announcement and avoid commitments that could conflict with existing laws or Supreme Court proceedings.