M.D. Memorial College Of Pharmacy vs Pharmacy Council Of India on 7 July, 2022

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

M.D. Memorial College Of Pharmacy vs Pharmacy Council Of India on 7 July, 2022

1. Issue notice. Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC assisting the Solicitor General of India, accepts notice on behalf of Respondent viz. Pharmacy Council of India. Considering the nature of prayer sought in the present petitions, he states that a counter affidavit is not necessary.

2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the instant petitions are taken up for hearing today itself.

3. Since the present batch of petitions raise identical grounds and seek identical reliefs, they are being disposed of by way of a common order.

4. Mr. Sanjay Sharawat, Advocate along with other counsel for the Petitioners, on instructions, only presses for relief being permission to the Petitioners to file requisite applications for approval of pharmacy courses for the academic session 2022-23, and corresponding direction to the Respondent to process the same, de hors the moratorium/prohibition imposed by Respondent vide letters dated 17th July, 2019 and 09th September, 2019.

5. The question of moratorium has been considered and decided by this Court vide judgment dated 07th March, 2022 in W.P.(C) 175/2021 titled -

"Shaheed Teg Bahadur College of Pharmacy v. Pharmacy Council of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9686/2022 and connected matters Page 4 of 7 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.07.2022 20:26:40 India" wherein the Court set aside the impugned communications dated 17th July, 2019 and 09th September, 2019 whereby moratorium was imposed by the Respondent on the opening of new pharmacy colleges for a period of 5 years w.e.f. academic year 2020-21.

6. The afore-said decision of this Court is now the subject-matter of SLP.(C) No. 4862/2022 along with connected batch matters, which is pending consideration before the Supreme Court.

7. Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India, on instructions, states that the prayer sought in the present petitions can be considered in light of the interim order passed by the Apex Court dated 31st May, 2022 in the afore-noted SLP, which reads as under: -

"SLP(Civil)Nos.14295-14296/2021 and batch SLP(Civil)Nos.19671/2021 and 4862/2022 be treated as the lead matters.

The parties to complete the pleadings in the matters by 22nd July, 2022.

By way of interim order, though we direct the Pharmacy Council of India to accept and process the applications of the applicants who were writ petitioners before the High Court, no final decision regarding grant of approval or non-approval shall be taken till the outcome of the present petitions.

List on 26th July, 2022."

8. Mr. Mehta further points out that in view of the afore-noted directions, Respondent has already issued a circular dated 03rd July, 2022 for opening the portal from 03rd July, 2022 to 15th July, 2022, and hence, the Petitioners can now take benefit of the same. Mr. Mehta, however, clarifies that if the Petitioners were to make such an application, it would not mean Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9686/2022 and connected matters Page 5 of 7 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.07.2022 20:26:40 that the Respondent would necessarily grant approval. Further, he submits that the processing of the applications would be subject to further directions of the Supreme Court and/or outcome of S.L.P.(C) No. 4862/2022 and connected batch matters.

9. In light of the fore-going, the present petitions are disposed with a direction that Petitioners shall be permitted to submit their applications on the Respondent's portal in terms of the circular dated 03rd July, 2022. Such applications shall be processed, subject to further directions of the Supreme Court and/or outcome of S.L.P.(C) No. 4862/2022 and connected batch matters.

10. At this juncture, Mr. Sharawat submits that despite opening of the portal, desirous applicants/institutions are being constrained to approach this court for this limited relief. He submits that several more hundred petitions, would be required to be filed for seeking the same relief, unless the court issues a suitable direction. Mr. Sharawat explains that some of the States are insisting that a writ petition number be mentioned in the application for obtaining an NOC, which is required to be furnished along with the application.

11. Although the State Governments are not parties herein, nonetheless, this court is being flooded with hundreds of homogeneous petitions seeking identical directions, which, in light of the stand taken by the Respondent, is wholly unnecessary.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9686/2022 and connected matters Page 6 of 7 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.07.2022 20:26:40

12. It is thus observed that since the portal is now open for all new institutions to submit their applications, no specific order/direction from a Court of law is necessary in this regard qua the requirement of submitting a writ petition number in the application for NOC.

13. The observations are not to be construed to mean that Court has diluted any of the statutory requirements for applying for recognition/ approval, including obtaining an NOC.

14. The above-captioned petitions along with all pending applications are disposed of in the above terms.

SANJEEV NARULA, J JULY 7, 2022/nk Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9686/2022 and connected matters Page 7 of 7 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.07.2022 20:26:40

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders