Sanjay Das Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

¶1

1 / 5

¶2

Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2024.12.10 12:16:31 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 1527 of 2013

¶6

1 - Sanjay Das, S/o Dhanau Das, aged about 23 Years R/o Village and Post Kakna, Tahsil Rajpur, Police Station Rajpur, Civil and Revenue Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Health and Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - Chhattisgarh State Pharmacy Council Raipur Chhattisgarh Through Its Registrar, Office of Chhattisgarh State Pharmacy Council Raipur Qtr. No. 88, Sector-2, Geetanjali Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Surguja University Ambikapur C.G. Through Its Registrar Surguja University Ambikapur Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - Chief Medical and Health Officer Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - Joint Director Health Services Surguja Division, Ambikapur Distt. Surguja Chhattisgarh

¶14

2 / 5

¶15

6 – Pharmacy Council of India, through its Registrar Pharmacy Council of India, New Delhi

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶18

For Petitioner	: Shri Ashwin Panickar, Advocate
For State/Respondents	: Ms. Isha Jajodia, Panel Lawyer
No.1, 4 and 5
For Respondent No.2	: Shri Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate

¶19

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶20

Order on Board

¶21

22/11/2024

¶22

1. The Petitioner has challenged the action of the Respondents authorities by which his registration with Chhattisgarh State Pharmacy Council as Pharmacist has been cancelled on the ground that the institution in which the Petitioner has pursued his studies was not recognised and affiliated by the Pharmacy Council of India. The Petitioner on the basis of registration as a Pharmacist Grade-II has been appointed in the office of the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Balrampur, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. However, on the basis of cancellation of his registration, he was removed from his services on 12.8.2013. As such, the Petitioner, being aggrieved by the action of his removal, has filed the instant petition for the following reliefs:

¶23

“1] That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions

¶24

3 / 5

¶25

quashing the impugned order dated 27.06.2013, passed by the Registrar, Chhattisgarh State Pharmacy Council, Raipur (Annex. P/1). The Pharmacy Council of India may also be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner and the Surguja university may kindly be directed one time approval.

¶26

2] That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions quashing the impugned order dated 12.08.2013, passed by the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Balrampur (Annex. P/2) and the petitioner may kindly be allowed to continue on the post of Pharmacist Grade-II, C.H.C. Shankargarh, District BalrampurRamanujganj.

¶27

3] That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant damages/compensation to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.10 lacs for spoiling the carrier of the petitioner.

¶28

4] That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, which it deems fit and proper.”

¶29

2. It has been submitted by Shri Ashwin Panickar, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that during pendency of this petition the Petitioner was further registered as a Pharmacist and he is

¶30

4 / 5

¶31

continuing with said registration and working in some private organisation.

¶32

3. Ms. Isha Jajodia, Learned Panel Lawyer for the State/Respondents No.1, 4 and 5 and Shri Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 jointly submitted that since the registration of the Petitioner has already been done, he has already got the relief which he has prayed at paragraph 1. Now, so far as the relief prayed at paragraph 2 is concerned, it cannot be granted as the Petitioner has got his position back. However, the Petitioner may file an application if such vacancy arises in future. At this juncture, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that so far as the relief prayed at paragraph 3 in respect of compensation part is concerned, the Petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the competent Court concerned for the relief of compensation prayed in this petition. The prayer has been opposed by the Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents.

¶33

4. I have heard Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available with due care.

¶34

5. From perusal of the material available, it seems that when the Petitioner obtained his degree from the Surguja University, the Surguja University was not having affiliation and approval from the Pharmacy Council of India, as such, the degree obtained by the Petitioner during the aforesaid period cannot be considered.

¶35

5 / 5

¶36

However, subsequently, the Pharmacy Council of India upon being satisfied with the required specifications has granted their approval and accordingly the Petitioner was registered as a Pharmacist. As such, the main grievance of the Petitioner has been redressed. So far as other reliefs are concerned, the Petitioner is at liberty to approach before the authorities and competent Court concerned for getting the same in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not opined anything on merits in respect of the grievances redressal of which the Petitioner is going to seek from the authorities concerned.

¶37

6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

( Amitendra Kishore Prasad ) JUDGE

¶40

Gopal Singh

Sanjay Das v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Das v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemant Kumar Mahilange Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amit Bhaskar Vs Indian OiL Corporation Ltd. And Ors.

Shreya Tiwari Vs State Govt. Of Chhattisgarh

Bharat Singh Gond and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Sunil Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Smt Munni Bai