Dismissed

Uday Pratap Singh and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 May 2023WRIC/40161/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed writ petitions seeking registration as pharmacists on the basis of diplomas from Singhania University, which lacked approval from the Pharmacy Council of India. It held that after the Education Regulations came into force, registration requires an approved examination under Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, and a UGC-recognized university is not exempt from seeking such approval.

What the court decided

AI extract

Uday Pratap Singh and 6 Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:113971-DB

¶2

Judgment Reserved on 20.04.2023 Judgement Delivered on 25.05.2023

¶3

A.F.R

¶4

Court No. - 3

¶5

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40161 of 2022 Petitioner :- Uday Pratap Singh And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Madan Mohan,Vaibhav Tripathi

¶6

Connected with

¶7

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12406 of 2023

¶8

Petitioner :- Arti And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Shukla,Shailendra Kumar Singh

¶9

Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Madan Mohan,Vaibhav Tripathi

¶10

And

¶11

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4834 of 2023 Petitioner :- Abhishek Pandey And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Madan Mohan,Vaibhav Tripath

¶12

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶13

(Per: Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶14

1. Since the controversy involved in the above petitions is identical, therefore, with the consent of learned counsels for the parties, all the three petitions are heard together and decided by this common order.

¶15

2. Heard Sri Ved Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Vaibhav Tripathi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for respondent no. 3 and Sri Madan Mohan, learned counsel for respondent no. 4 in the the above petitions.

¶16

3. These petitions have been filed by the petitioners who have obtained the Diploma in pharmacy from Singhania University, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, praying for a direction to the Pharmacy Council of Uttar Pradesh to enter the name of the petitioners in the First Register maintained by them as a pharmacist to practice in the State of U.P. under Section 31 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and further a direction to allow the petitioners to practice as a pharmacist after completing all the formalities under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the Pharmacy Practice Regulations, 2015.

¶17

4. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioners, are that after passing intermediate (Class XIIth) they took admission in "two years' Diploma course in Pharmacy" from Singhania University, which is recognized under Section 2 (f) of the University Grants Commission Act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1956). According to the petitioners they completed their course and diploma in Pharmacy was awarded to them by the aforesaid University. It has been stated in Paragraph 10 of the Writ Petition No. 40161 of 2022 that the petitioners undertook training of 500 hrs in reputed hospitals as per requirement of the education regulation framed under Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1948). Thereafter, in paragraph nos. 11, 13, 14, 15 of the Writ petition No. 40161 of 2022 it has

¶18

¶19

been stated by the petitioners that after completing all the formalities they approached the respondent no. 4 for their registration in accordance with Section 31 read with Section 10 of the Act, 1948 to enter their name in the register but the respondent no. 4 declined the request of the petitioners for the reason that the aforesaid Singhania University has not been added on the website maintained by the respondent no. 3 under Section 12 of the Act, 1948 and the Course/Diploma in Pharmacy, conducted by the Singhania University is not recognized by the Pharmacy Council of India. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present writ petitions praying for the relief aforestated.

¶20

SUBMISSIONs

¶21

5 . Learned counsel for the petitioners submits as under:

¶22

i) The judgment relied by the respondent no. 4, in paragraph 29 of the counter affidavit in Writ Petition No. 40161 of 2022, has no application on facts of the present case inasmuch as the controversy in that case was between the AICTE and the respondent no. 3 and not between the respondent no. 4 and the diploma holders. ii) Singhania University is a University established under law and has been recognised under Section 2 (f) of the Act, 1956. Therefore, the respondent nos. 3 & 4 cannot deny registration of the petitioners under the Act, 1948 on the basis of Diploma granted by the said University. iii) A University does not require any recognition for a particular course from the Pharmacy Council of India. Therefore, even if the Singhania University has not obtained recognition for pharmacy course from the respondent no. 2, still registration cannot be denied inasmuch as a University

¶23

¶24

does not require any recognition for the pharmacy course under Section 12 of the Act, 1948 from the Pharmacy Council of India. Reliance is placed upon the judgment in case of The Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust Vidharbha Institute of Pharmacy and Ors., (2020) SCC Online SC 296 and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharatidassan University and Another v. All India Council for Technical Education and Others, AIR 2001 SC 2861 Para 15 and 16) , Yashraj Institute of Professional Studies v. Indian Nursing Council New Delhi and Others (2022) 1 ADJ 326 (LB) .

¶25

6. Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 3 submits that

¶26

i) the course of Pharmacy is not recognized by the Pharmacy Council of India i.e., respondent no. 3, therefore, respondent no. 4 cannot register the petitioners. The Pharmacy Council of India has been constituted as a body empowered to regulate the education and profession of pharmacy in India. Therefore, in view of the provisions of the Act, 1948 covering all areas including approval of courses, laying down course contents, eligibility conditions for students as well as teachers, evaluation standards of examination, grant of registration, entry of higher qualification in the same discipline, taking action for infamous conducts etc. are well within powers of the respondent no. 3 i.e., Pharmacy Council of India. Therefore, unless the pharmacy course allegedly been conducted and the diploma being awarded by the Singhania University is recognized by the respondent no. 3, registration of the petitioners under the Act, 1948 cannot be done. Referring to various paragraphs of the counter

¶27

¶28

affidavit, it is submitted that the writ petitions are totally misconceived and no relief can be granted in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust Vidharbha Institute of Pharmacy and Ors. (supra) and in Ranjan Sinha and Another vs. Ajay Kumar Vishwakarna and Ors. (2017) 14 SCC 774

¶29

7. Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel refers to paragraphs 6, 7 & 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 and submits that the writ petition is totally misconceived and therefore, deserve to be dismissed.

¶30

8. Learned counsel for respondent no. 4 submits that since Singhania University is not approved for the pharmacy course under Section 12 of the Act, 1948, therefore, the respondent cannot register the petitioners on the strength of diploma granted by the Singhania University. Reference is made specifically to Paragraph Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 13 of the counter affidavit of the respondent no. 4.

¶31

9. Learned counsel for the parties has not made any other submission except those aforenoted. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and with their consent the following questions are being framed for determination in these writ petitions:-

¶32

a) Whether the petitioners are entitled to be registered under the Act, 1948 on the basis of diploma certificates granted by Singhania University, which admittedly does not have any

¶33

¶34

approval or recognition from Pharmacy Council of India under Section 12 of the Act, 1948?

¶35

b) Whether the Singhania University, which is recognized under Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act, 1956, is not required to take any approval/recognition/permission for awarding diploma in pharmacy under Section 12 of the Act, 1948 from the Pharmacy Council of India?

¶36

10. To answer the aforesaid questions it is necessary to examine the Statements of Objects and Reasons and scheme of the Pharmacy Act, 1948. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, is reproduced below:

¶37

"Statement of Objects and Reasons - It is desirable that, as in most other countries, only persons who have attained a minimum standard of professional education should be permitted to practise the profession of Pharmacy. It is accordingly proposed to establish a Central Council of Pharmacy, which will prescribe the minimum standards of education and approved courses of study and examinations of Pharmacists, and Provincial Pharmacy Councils, which will be responsible for the maintenance of provincial registers of qualified pharmacists. It is further proposed to empower Provincial Governments to prohibit the dispensing of medicine on the prescription of a medical practitioner otherwise than by, or under the direction and personal supervision of, a registered pharmacist."

¶38

11. It is further relevant to note Sections 10, 11, 12, 29, 30, 31 & 32 of the Pharmacy Act which are reproduced below:

¶39

"10. Education Regulations. - (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the Central Council may, subject to the approval of the Central Government, make regulations, to be called the Education Regulations, prescribing the minimum standard of education required for qualification as a pharmacist.

¶40

(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, the Education Regulations may prescribe-

¶41

(a) the nature and period of study and of practical training to be undertaken before admission to an examination.

¶42

(b) the equipment and facilities to be provided for students undergoing approved courses of study;

¶43

¶44

(c) the subjects of examination and the standards therein to be attained.

¶45

(d) any other conditions of admission to examinations.

¶46

(3) Copies of the draft of Education Regulations and of all subsequent amendment thereof shall be furnished by the Central Council to all State Governments, and the Central Council shall before submitting the Education Regulations or any amendment thereof, as the case may be, to the Central Government for approval under sub-section (1) take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the date of furnishing of the copies as aforesaid.

¶47

(4) The Education Regulations shall be published in the Official Gazette and in such other manner as the Central Council may direct.

¶48

(5) The Executive Committee shall from time to time report to the Central Council on the efficacy of the Education Regulations and may recommend to the Central Council such amendments thereof as it may think fit.

¶49

11. Application of Education Regulations to States. - At any time after the constitution of the State Council under Chapter III and after consultation with the State Council, the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare that the Education Regulations shall take effect in the State:

¶50

Provided that where no such declaration has been made, the Education Regulations shall take effect in the State on the expiry of three years from the date of the constitution of the State Council.

¶51

12. Approved courses of study and examinations .- (1) Any authority in a State [***] which conducts a course of study for pharmacists may apply to the Central Council for approval of the course, and the Central Council, if satisfied, after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said course of study is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said course of study to be an approved course of study for the purpose of admission to an approved examination for pharmacists.

¶52

(2) Any authority in a State [***] which holds an examination in pharmacy may apply to the Central Council for approval of the examination, and the Central Council, if satisfied, after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said examination is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said examination to be an approved examination for the purpose of qualifying for registration as a pharmacist under this Act.

¶53

¶54

(3) Every authority in the States [***] which conducts an approved course of study or holds an approved examination shall furnish such information as the Central Council may, from time to time, require as to the courses of study and training and examination to be undergone, as to the ages at which such courses of study and examination are required to be undergone and generally as to the requisites for such courses of study and examination.

¶55

29. Preparation and maintenance of register .-(l) As soon as may be after this chapter has taken effect in any State, the State Government shall cause to be prepared in the manner hereinafter provided a register of pharmacists for the State.

¶56

(2) The State Council shall as soon as possible after it is constituted assume the duty of maintaining the register in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

¶57

(3) The register shall include the following particulars, namely:

¶58

(a) the full name and residential address of the registered person;

¶59

(b) the date of his first admission to the register;

¶60

(c) his qualifications for registration;

¶61

(d) his professional address, and if he is employed by any person, the name of such person;

¶62

(e) such further particulars as may be prescribed.

¶63

30. Preparation of first register .- For the purpose of preparing the first register, the State Government shall by notification in the Official Gazette constitute a Registration Tribunal consisting of three persons, and shall also appoint a Registrar who shall act as Secretary of the Registration Tribunal.

¶64

(2) The State Government shall, by the same or a like notification, appoint a date on or before which applications for registration, which shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee, shall be made to the Registration Tribunal.

¶65

(3) The Registration Tribunal shall examine every application received on or before the appointed date, and if it is satisfied that the applicant is qualified for registration under section 31, shall direct the entry of the name of the applicant on the register.

¶66

(4) The first register so prepared shall thereafter be published in such manner as the State Government may direct, and any person aggrieved by a decision of the Registration Tribunal expressed or implied in the register as so published may, within sixty days from the date of such publication, appeal to an authority appointed by the State Government in this behalf by notification in the Official Gazette.

¶67

¶68

(5) The Registrar shall amend the register in accordance with the decisions of the authority appointed under sub-section (4) and shall thereupon issue to every person whose name is entered in the register a certificate of registration in the prescribed form.

¶69

(6) Upon the constitution of the State Council, the register shall be given into its custody, and the State Government may direct that all or any specified part of the application fees for registration in the first register shall be paid to the credit of the State Council.

¶70

31. Qualifications for entry on first register. -[A person who has attained the age of eighteen years shall be entitled] on payment of the prescribed fee to have his name entered in the first register if he resides. or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy, in the State and if he-

¶71

(a) holds a degree or diploma in pharmacy or pharmaceutical chemistry or a chemist and druggist diploma of an Indian University or a State Government as the case may be. or a prescribed qualification granted by an authority outside [***] India, or

¶72

(b) holds a degree of an Indian University other than a degree in pharmacy or pharmaceutical chemistry, and has been engaged in the compounding of drugs in a hospital or dispensary or other place in which drugs are regularly dispensed on prescriptions of medical practitioners for a total period of not less than three years, or

¶73

(c) has passed an. examination recognized as adequate by the State Government for commoners or dispensers, or

¶74

(d) has been engaged in the compounding of drugs in a hospital or dispensary or other place in which drugs are regularly dispensed on prescriptions of medical practitioners for a total period of not less than five years prior to the date notified under subsection (2) of section 30.

¶75

32. Qualifications for subsequent registration . -(1) After the date appointed under sub-section (2) of section 30 and before the Education Regulations have, by or under section 11, taken effect in the State, [a person who has attained the age of eighteen years shall on payment of the prescribed fee] be entitled to have his name entered in the register if he resides or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy in the State and if he—

¶76

(a) satisfies the conditions prescribed with the prior approval of the Central Council, or where no conditions have been prescribed, the conditions entitling a person to have his name entered on the first register as set out in section 31, or (b) is a registered pharmacist in another State, or

¶77

(c) possesses a qualification approved under section 14: Provided that no person shall be entitled '[under clause (a) or clause (c)] to have his name entered on the register unless he has passed a matriculation examination or an examination

¶78

¶79

prescribed as being equivalent to a matriculation examination.

¶80

(2) After the Education Regulations have by or under section 11 taken effect in the State, a person shall on payment of the prescribed fee be entitled to have his name entered on the register if he has attained the age of [eighteen years], if he resides, or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy, in the State and if he has passed an approved examination or possesses a qualification approved under section 14 '[or is a registered pharmacist in another State.]"

¶81

12. The Pharmacy Act, 1948, is a welfare legislation enacted with object to make better provisions for regulation of profession and practice of pharmacy and to prescribe qualification for being registered as pharmacist. Any person who wants to come into the profession and practice of pharmacy has to comply with the provisions of the Pharmacy Act. Section 10 of the Act empowers the Central Council to make regulations to be called the Education Regulations with the approval of the Central Government prescribing the minimum standard of education required for the qualification as a pharmacist.

¶82

13. The aforesaid regulations regulate:-

¶83

(a) the nature and period of studying and practical training;

¶84

(b) equipment and facilities to be provided for students undergoing approved course of study;

¶85

¶86

(d) any other conditions to be examined.

¶87

It is pertinent to mention here that in exercise of the powers under Section 10 of the Act, 1948, the Pharmacy Council of India has framed Education regulations, 1991, which are in force with regard to the course of diploma in pharmacy. Clause (9) of the Regulation provides as under:-

¶88

"9. Approval of the authority conducting the course of study:-

¶89

¶90

The course of regular academic study prescribed under regulation 7 shall be conducted in an institution, approved by the Pharmacy Council of India under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948.

¶91

Provided that the Pharmacy Council of India shall not approve any institution under this regulation unless it provides adequate arrangements or teaching in regard to building accommodation, equipment and teaching staff as specified in Appendix-B to these regulations."

¶92

14. Section 12 of the Act provides that any authority in a State which conducts a course of study for pharmacists may apply to the Pharmacy Council of India for an approval of the course and the Pharmacy Council of India, if satisfied, after such inquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said course of study is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said course to be an approved course of study for the purpose of admission to an approved examination for Pharmacist.

¶93

15. Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act provides that any authority in a State which holds an examination in pharmacy may apply to the Central Council for approval of the examination, and Central Council, if satisfied, after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said examination is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said examination to be an approved examination for the purposes of qualifying for registration as a pharmacist under this Act.

¶94

16 . Section 29 of the Act, 1948 mandates about preparation and maintenance of Register. Section 30 provides procedure for preparation of First Register. Section 30 (4) provides for the publication of the First Register. Section 31 provides the qualifications for entry into the First Register.

¶95

¶96

17. Section 32 of the Act, 1948 provides the procedure & qualifications for entry into the subsequent register after publication of the First Register. It provides for registration of a pharmacist in the State Register subject to the conditions that such a person:

¶97

(i) has attained the age of 18 years;

¶98

(ii) paid the prescribed fees;

¶99

(iii) resides or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy in the State: and if he-

¶100

(a) satisfies the conditions prescribed with the prior approval of the Central Council, or where no condition has been prescribed to have his name registered as set-out in Section 31; or

¶101

(b) is a registered pharmacist in another State; or

¶102

¶103

Provided that no person shall be entitled under Clause (a) or (c) to have his name entered on the register unless he has passed a matriculation examination or an examination prescribed as being equivalent to a matriculation examination.

¶104

Sub-section (2) of Section 32 makes it mandatory that such person must have passed an approved examination. The expression "approved examination" means the approved examinations in terms of Sub-section (2) of the Section 12 of the Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 12 uses the expression " any authority in a State ". The phrase used " any authority in a State " is wide enough and does not exclude any University recognized by the University Grants Commission.

¶105

¶106

18. Thus, unless a person has satisfied the conditions prescribed under Section 32 of the Act, he shall not be entitled for the registration in the State Register maintained by the State Council.

¶107

19. The petitioners are relying upon the provisions of Section 31 of the Act which were applicable for the preparation of the first register till the Education Regulations were not in force. After the Education Regulations prescribing qualification came into force, Section 31 has no applicability as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Ranjan Sinha (Supra), which has been further affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Pharmacy Council of India v. Aatmaram Dariyani & Ors (2018) 11 SCC 341. In Ranjan Singh (Supra) the Supreme Court observed as under:-

¶108

" 38 . In view of the above, we may conclude that when the First Register of Pharmacists prepared by the Registration Tribunal was published by the Government of Bihar under sub-section (4) of Section 30, the same is conclusive and any amendments by way of inclusions can be carried out till the framing of Education Regulations by the Pharmacy Council of India. For doing this, competent authority may take into consideration the qualification as prescribed by Section 31 of the Act. However, after the coming into force of the Education Regulations as well as at the time of subsequent registration, the Government has to necessarily adhere to the Education Regulations. Any person who does not satisfy the qualifications as per the Education Regulations shall not be entitled to seek entry in the Pharmacy register. "

¶109

20. After the Education Regulations are framed by the Pharmacy Council of India under Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, the first register is required to be published in terms of Sub-section (4) of Section 30 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948. Once the First Register is published no person is entitled for any entry in the First Register. A name can be entered in subsequent registration after the publication of the First Register only in accordance with Section 32 of the Act. For the purposes of subsequent registration,

¶110

¶111

qualification possessed by an applicant must be an approved examination in terms of Section 12 of the Act read with Regulation 9 of the Education Regulations, 1991, of the Pharmacy Council of India. If a person has not passed an approved examination or does not possesses qualification approved under Section 12 or Section 14, he is not entitled for registration in the State Pharmacy Register.

¶112

21. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussions, we answer the first question in negative and hold that the petitioners are not entitled to be registered under the Act, 1948 on the basis of diploma certificates granted by Singhania University, which admittedly does not have any approval or recognition from Pharmacy Council of India under Section 12 of the Act, 1948 .

¶113

22. It has been vehemently argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that once a University is recognized under Section 2 (f) of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, it has right to confer degrees under Section 22 of the UGC Act. Section 2 (f) and Section 22 of the the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, are reproduced below:-

¶114

" 2(f) "University" means a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provisional Act or a State, and includes any such institution as may, in consultation with the University concerned, be recognised by the Commission in accordance with the regulations made in this behalf under this Act.

¶115

22. Right to confer degrees .- (1) The right of conferring or granting degrees shall be exercised only by a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provisional Act or a State Act or an institution deemed to be a University under section 3 or an institution specially empowered by an Act of Parliament to confer or grant degrees.

¶116

(2) Save as provided in sub-section (1), no person or authority shall confer, or grant, or hold himself or itself out as entitled to confer or grant, any degree.

¶117

¶118

(3) For the purpose of this section, "degree" means any such degree as may, with the previous approval of the Central Government, be specified in this behalf by the Commission by notification in the Official Gazette."

¶119

23. From the aforesaid provisions of the UGC Act, it is crystal clear that a University recognized under Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act, has a right to confer and award degrees but for the purposes of registration as pharmacist in the State Register maintained by the Pharmacy Council of a State, such degree/course must be an approved course under Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act.

¶120

24. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has heavily relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bharatidassan University (Supra) and contended that a University is not required to seek any approval for initiating course in the field of pharmacy. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment. The aforesaid judgment is primarily on the issue of applicability of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 and Section 2 (h) of the AICTE Act specifically excludes the University from its ambit. Therefore, the said judgment has no relevance for the purpose of the instant case. Reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Yashraj Institute of Professional Studies v. Indian Nursing Council, New Delhi [2022 (1) ADJ 326] has no application on the facts of the case.

¶121

25. Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act mandates every authority in state which conducts an examination in pharmacy, to apply for approval of the examination from the Pharmacy Council of India as per the scheme of the Act. Since University in our considered view is also covered under the phrase " any authority in a State " therefore, a University is not exempt from seeking approval from the Pharmacy Council of India to conduct an

¶122

¶123

examination in pharmacy. Therefore, diploma in pharmacy awarded by the Singhania University which admittedly does not have any approval from the Pharmacy Council of India, therefore, it is not an approved qualification for the purposes of registration of the petitioners as pharmacists in the State Register under the Act after the Education Regulations, 1991, came into force.

¶124

26. In the case of Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy and Others (Supra) while dealing with the conflict of applicability of the AICTE Act, 1987 and the Pharmacy Act, 1948, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically held as under:-

¶125

11. As observed hereinabove, the issue involved in the present batch of cases is regarding the applicability of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 or the AICTE Act, 1987 in relation to subject of pharmacy including the approval of courses of study, minimum standards of education required for qualification as a pharmacist, registration as a pharmacist, regulation of future professional conduct etc. In other words, the question is as to whether the mandate of the PCI or that of the AICTE would prevail on the question of granting approval and related matters to any institution for conducting pharmacy education course, if there is any conflict/contradictions in the opinions of these two bodies. The issue is as to which body, i.e. AICTE or PCI would primarily be responsible for regulation of pharmaceutical regulation in India .

¶126

12. While answering the issues/questions involved in the present batch of petitions, first of all, what is required to be considered is whether the Pharmacy Act which is a prior Act to that of AICTE Act can be said to be a special Act with special provisions in the field of Pharmacy ? The Statement of Objects and Reasons for the Pharmacy Act is as under:

¶127

“It is desirable that, as in most other countries, only persons who have attained a minimum standard of professional education should be permitted to practise the Profession of Pharmacy. It is accordingly proposed to establish a Central Council of Pharmacy, which will prescribe the minimum standards of education and approve courses of study and examinations for Pharmacists, and Provincial Pharmacy Councils, which will be responsible for the maintenance of provincial registers of qualified pharmacists. It is further proposed to empower Provincial Governments to prohibit the dispensing of medicine on the

¶128

¶129

prescription of a medical practitioner otherwise than by, or under the direct and personal supervision of, a registered pharmacist.”

¶130

12.5. Thus, considering the various provisions of the Pharmacy Act and the regulations made therein, it can be said that the Pharmacy Act is a complete code in itself in the subject of pharmacy. The PCI has been constituted as a body empowered to regulate the education and profession of pharmacy in India. It cannot be disputed that the subject of pharmacy is a special and not a general subject. From the relevant provisions of the Pharmacy Act, more particularly, the provisions referred to hereinabove, the Pharmacy Act exclusively covers all areas inclusive of approval of courses, laying down course content, eligibility conditions for students as well as teachers, evaluation standards of examination, grant of registration, entry of higher qualifications in the same discipline, taking action for infamous conduct etc. It also contains a penal provision. Thus, the legislative intent in enacting the Pharmacy Act seems to be to ensure that there is seamless regulation of the profession. To carry out the objective and purpose for enacting the Pharmacy Act, the Legislature has established under the Statute the autonomous statutory authority i.e. Pharmacy Council of India. Thus it can be said that in the field of pharmacy, the Pharmacy Act is a special law.

¶131

13. Now having held that the Pharmacy Act is a special Act dealing with the special subject of pharmacy, the next question which is posed for consideration of this Court is whether in the field of pharmacy, the Pharmacy Act would prevail or the AICTE Act? The next question is whether in the profession of pharmacy, the PCI shall have the exclusive jurisdiction or the AICTE?

¶132

14. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions and as observed hereinabove, the Pharmacy Act is a Special Act in the field of pharmacy and it is a complete code in itself in the field of pharmacy, the Pharmacy Act shall prevail over the AICTE Act which, as observed hereinabove, is a general statute dealing with technical education/institutions. Therefore, the submission on behalf of AICTE and/or concerned educational institutions that the AICTE Act is a subsequent law and in the definition of “technical education” it includes the “pharmacy” and therefore it can be said to be an “implied repeal”, cannot be accepted. At his stage, it is required to be noted that as such in the AICTE Act there is no specific repeal of the Pharmacy Act, more particularly when, as observed hereinabove, the Pharmacy Act is a Special Act and the subsequent enactment of AICTE Act is general and therefore the Pharmacy Act being a Special Act must prevail. Apart from that, with regard to several aspects, there is no provision made in AICTE Act which are exclusively within the domain of PCI. Thus, it cannot be accepted that there is ‘implied repeal’ of the Pharmacy Act.

¶133

¶134

17. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by this Court in Shri Prince Shivaji Maratha Boarding House’s College of Architecture. Otherwise on merits also, as observed and held hereinabove, the Pharmacy Act which is a Special Act in the field of pharmacy shall prevail and consequently so far as the recognition of degrees and diplomas of pharmacy education is concerned, the Pharmacy Act shall prevail . As observed hereinabove, PCI constituted under the provisions of the Pharmacy Act which is consisting of the experts in the field of pharmacy and/or related subjects shall prevail. Consequently, the norms and regulations set by the PCI and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act would have to be followed by an institution imparting education for degrees and diplomas in pharmacy .

¶135

20. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is held that in the field of Pharmacy Education and more particularly so far as the recognition of degrees and diplomas of Pharmacy Education is concerned, the Pharmacy Act, 1948 shall prevail. The norms and regulations set by the PCI and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act would have to be followed by the concerned institutions imparting education for degrees and diplomas in pharmacy, including the norms and regulations with respect to increase and/or decrease in intake capacity of the students and the decisions of the PCI shall only be followed by the institutions imparting degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy. The questions are answered accordingly.

¶136

27. In view of the categorical provisions of Section 10, 11, 12, 30, 31 & 32 of Act, 1948 and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. S.K. Toshniwal (Supra) , we are of the considered view that the Pharmacy Act, being special legislation governing the field of pharmacy shall prevail over any other general law for the purpose of registration of the candidates as Pharmacist in the State Register and consequently, in the Central Register. Therefore, any degree obtained by the petitioners which has no approval of the Pharmacy Council of India in terms of Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act would not entitle them for their registration in the State Register maintained under Section 31 of the Pharmacy Act. Thus, the question no. 2 is also answered in

¶137

¶138

negative and we hold that the Singhania University, which is recognized under Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act, 1956, is required to take approval/recognition for awarding diploma in pharmacy under Section 12 of the Act, 1948 from the Pharmacy Council of India for making such Diploma in Pharmacy to be the approved qualification for the purposes of registration of such diploma holder in the State Register .

¶139

28. For all the reasons aforestated, we do not find any merit in the writ petitions. Consequently, all the writ petitions are dismissed .

¶140

Date :- 25.5.2023 Shubham Arya

¶141

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.)

¶142

¶143

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Uday Pratap Singh and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Uday Pratap Singh and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Baburam Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kanpur Development Authority Vs District Consumer Dispute and Redressal Kanpur Nagar and Another

Abhishek Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arti and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Parbhu Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others