Disposed

Shanti Niketan College of Pharmacy v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Oct 2017CWP/1170/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a refusal to grant approval for running a two-year pharmacy course, the Court observed that the college had addressed deficiencies regarding language lab software and external finishing within the stipulated time. The court directed the regulator to grant approval.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No. 4 to issue necessary approval for the petitioner to run a two-year pharmacy course within two weeks.

Shanti Niketan College of Pharmacy Vs… — Education and Admissions | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 1170 of 2016 Decided on: October 5, 2017

¶3

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Shanti Niketan College of Pharmacy …………….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ……….Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶4

Coram

¶5

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the petitioner Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Advocate. For the respondents Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 and 2.

¶8

Mr. Surender Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶9

Mr. Vijay Arora, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶10

Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (oral):

¶11

Pursuant to direction issued by this Court, the Committee

¶12

has now inspected the premises of the petitioner-institute.

¶13

Following are the final observations of the Committee (Page-550):

¶14

“(1) As per direction only four members out of 5 members were present during visit.

¶15

(2) Language Lab Software not available. (3) External finishing should be done.”

¶16

Quite apparently, deficiency pertains only with regard to

¶17

non-availability of ‘language lab software’ and external finishing

¶18

---------------------------------------------------------------------1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? .

¶19

¶20

work. Mr. Negi, learned Senior Advocate, points out that in so far external finishing work is concerned, petitioner is in the process of completing the same. With regard to installation of ‘language lab software’, he invites our attention to invoice dated 29.9.2017, whereby amount for purchase of software stands remitted and software is likely to be installed within one week.

¶21

In these circumstances, we find petitioner to have fulfilled the statutory requirements and directions issued by the Regulator, as such, we direct respondent No.4 to issue necessary approval in favour of the petitioner, for running two year pharmacy course.

¶22

Needful be positively done within a period of two weeks from today, and result of students be declared within one week, thereafter, as stated by Mr. Surender Sharma, Advocate.

¶23

Accordingly, in view of above, present petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

¶24

Copy dasti.

¶25

(Sanjay Karol) Acting Chief Justice

¶26

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

¶27

October 5, 2017 (vikrant)

Shanti Niketan College of Pharmacy v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Niketan College of Pharmacy v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biasan Devi Vs State of Hp

Court on its own Motion Vs State of Hp

Court on its own Motion Vs State of Hp

Guru Dev Vs Ajv Prashad

State of Hp Vs Gurdial Pal

Ishwar Dass Mekta Vs State of Hp