Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Nikiben Rajeshbhai Brahmbhatt vs State Of Gujarat & 7 on 15 October, 2014

Author: K.M.Thaker

Bench: K.M.Thaker

         C/SCA/3508/2014                               ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3508 of 2014
                                    TO
            SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3517 of 2014
================================================================
           NIKIBEN RAJESHBHAI BRAHMBHATT....Petitioner(s)
                             Versus
               STATE OF GUJARAT & 7....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR.HASMUKH S SOLANKI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ATIT D THAKORE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR KT DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR YC CONTRACTOR, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MS MAMTA R VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 6
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 2 , 5 , 7
================================================================

        CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER

                             Date : 15/10/2014


                           COMMON ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate for the petitioners, learned  AGP,   Mr.   A.D.   Thakore,   learned   advocate   for  respondent   No.8   and   Ms.   Vyas,   learned   advocate  for respondent No.6 have, at the outset, jointly  submitted   that   all   the   petitions   of   this   group  are   almost   identical   and   except   some   minor  details, the basic facts, the contentions and the  Page 1 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER relief prayed for are common and similar in all  petitions and that, therefore, all the petitions  of this group may be decided by common order.

2. In   view   of   the   said   submission,   for   the  purpose   of   present   order,   reference   to   the  details mentioned in and relief prayed for in the  petition being SCA No.3508/2014, is taken as the  base. 

3. In   SCA   No.3508/2014,   the   petitioners   have  prayed, inter alia, that:

"7B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue the writ  of mandamus or any other writ in the nature of mandamus  and/or direction and further be pleased to direct the  respondent no.3 and 8 to provide the certificate as a  pharmacist to the petitioner and register the present  petitioner as Pharmacist under the Pharmacy Act
C. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of  mandamus   or   any   other   appropriate   writ,   order   or  direction to the respondent no.3 and 8 to register the  present   petitioner   as   Pharmacist   under   the   Pharmacy  Act, 1948."

4. So as to justify the relief prayed for in the  petition,   the   petitioners   have   averred,  inter   alia, that:

Page 2 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER

"3.1 The   petitioner   states   that   the   petitioner   has  passed   her   H.S.C.   Exam   in   the   Science   Stream   in   the  year­2005   from   the   Gujarat   Stat   &   Higher   Secondary  Education   Board,   Gandhinagar.   The   petitioner   states  that   thereafter   the   petitioner   has   taken   admission  through   respondent   no.2   (Central   Admission   Committee)  by   the   way   of   Management   Quota   in   respondent   no.6  college (B.D. Rao Pharmacy College) which is approved  self finance college of respondent no.4 (SNDT Women's  University) in the course of Diploma of Pharmacy int eh  Academic year 2005­2006.  
3.2 The petitioner states that petitioner has started  study int eh respondent no.6 college and she has been  successfully   passed   the   Final   Year   of   the   Diploma   in  Pharmacy Course in the year 2007.  
3.3 The petitioner states that thereafter as per the  rules and regulation of Pharmacy Council of India the  petitioner   have   completed   Practical   Training   Programm  Accordingly.  
3.4 The   petitioner   states   and   submits   that   after  completing her Diploma of Pharmacy­2007 the petitioner  took   admission   through   respondent   no.2   (Central  Admission Committee) in respondent no.7 college (G.B.H  Pharmacy College­Aniyad) which is approved self finance  college   of   the   respondent   no.5   Gujarat   University   in  the   Course   of   Degree   Pharmacy   for   the   academic   year  2007­2008.  
3.5 The   petitioner   states   that   the   petitioner   has  started studies in respondent no.7 college and she has  been successfully completing her Degree of Pharmacy in  the year April­2010. 
3.6 The petitioner states that thereafter as per the  rules and regulation of Pharmacy Council of India the  petitioner have completed Practical Training Programme  for completing her degree of Pharmacy accordingly. 
3.7 The   petitioner   states   that   the   respondent   no.7  B.Pharm College has approval from the respondent no.3  (Pharmacy Council) herein i.e. the Pharmacy Council of  India.
3.8 The   petitioner   states   that   thereafter   the  petitioner has successfully completing her both Diploma  in Pharmacy and Degree in Pharmacy as per the rules and  regulations the present petitioner has applied for the  registration of Pharmacist.   The respondent no.8 i.e.  Gujarat State Pharmacy Council herein has rejected the  said application on the ground that the D.Pharm college  i.e.   respondent   no.6   (B.D.   Rao   Pharmacy   College)  Page 3 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER college even  that college  are also  shut down was  not  holding   approval   from   Pharmacy   Council   of   India   i.e.  respondent no.3 herein.   The petitioner further states  and   submits   that   the  petitioner   has   been   given   an  application   under   the   RTI   Act   to   the   respondent   no.8  that successfully completing her Diploma of Pharmacy as  per the norms and rules of the Pharmacy Act even that  after   the   completing   degree   of   Pharmacy   and   said  college   having   the   approval   from   the   respondent   no.3  even though the petitioner cannot get registration of  Pharmacist as per the rules of respondent no.3 and as  per   Pharmacy   Act,   1948   and   suggested   the   present  petitioner to approach respondent no.3 for the further  assistance.  
3.9 The   petitioner   states   and   submits   that   the   said  act   of   the   respondent   No.1   to   8   is   contrary   to   law,  perverse, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the  Constitution of India. 
3.10 The   petitioner   respectfully   submits   that  Diploma   admission   has   been   granted   from   the   academic  year 2005­2006 by Central Admission Committee i.e. the  respondent no.2 and the said committee functions with  the   SNDT   University   i.e.   respondent   no.4.     The  petitioner further submitted that Degree admission has  been   granted   from   the   academic   year   2008­2009   by  Central   Admission   Committee   i.e.   respondent   no.2   and  the   said   committee   functions   with   the   Gujarat  University   i.e.   respondent   No.5.     It   is   respectfully  submitted   that   the   authorities   i.e.   the   respondent  no.1, 2, 4,5 are duly bound at the admission is granted  to   a   college,   which   has   the   requisite   permission  recognitions   and   affiliations   from   all   the   concerned  authorities.  The petitioner states that the petitioner  has never been apprised, informed or told by any of the  concerned  respondents  that   their   admission  is   subject  to   recognition/affiliations   from   respective  authorities.   It   is   an   admitted   position   that   the  admission to the Pharmacy College run by the respondent  no.6   trust   have   been   made   by   following   the   admission  pattern on merit basis only through respondent no.2 and  authorities have acted in a manner which reassures that  students   taking   admission   that   respondent   no.6   trust  run Pharmacy College is duly recognized and having due  affiliations   of   the   concerned   authorities   for   the  educational   facilities   provided   by   it   and   finally  conferring duly recognized valid and lawful degree by  the respondent no.4 SNDT University, which at the end  of the day shall be the basic for the futures of the  students so enrolled."

5. Today,   when   the   matter   is   called   out   and  Page 4 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER taken   out   for   hearing,   Mr.   Solanki,   learned  advocate   for   the   petitioners,   Mr.   Thakore,  learned   advocate   for   respondent   No.8,   Ms.   Vyas,  learned   advocate   for   respondent   No.6   and  Mr.Ashar,   learned   AGP   are   present.     Mr.   Dave,  learned   advocate   for   respondent   No.3   has   filed  leave note.  Learned advocate for respondent No.4  is not present. 

6. Today, during the hearing, Mr. A.D. Thakore,  learned   advocate   for   respondent   No.,8   i.e.  Pharmacy  Council   of India,  has  placed  on record  decision/communication dated 14.8.2014.  The said  communication/decision reads thus:

"Sub:i) Decision  of   257th  /   EC   (July,  2014)  of   the  PCI. 
ii) Consideration   of   approval   of   D.   Pharm. 

course unapproved batch, for the year 2005­ 2006 & 2007­2008 Sir, This is a reference to the subject cited above. In this  connection I am directed to state that matter regarding  approval   of   your   institution   was   placed   in   257th  Executive Committee of the PCI in its meeting held in  13th July, 2014, decision as enclosed as Appendix­A. The  recommendation  of the  Executive  Committee  meeting  Page 5 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER is subject to ratification from Central Council meeting  of PCI.

You are also requested  to also submit closure fee of  Rs.50,000/­ in  the  form  of Demand Draft in favour of  Pharmacy Council of India at New Delhi."

7. Learned advocates for the petitioners and the  respondents have jointly submitted that by virtue  of   the   said   communication/decision   dated  14.8.2014, the Executive Committee has resolved,  approved and recommended for approval of D.Pharm.  course and the batch for the year 2005­2006 and  2007­2008   of   respondent   No.6   institute   and   the  students. 

8. The minutes of 02.257th  meeting of Executive  Committee of the Pharmacy Council of India, which  was convened on 13.7.2014, is attached/annexed to  the said communication/decision dated 14.8.2014. 

9. According to the said minutes, the Executive  Committee   discussed   State   /   File   No.   Name   of  institutions - Gujarat 170944/2011­PCI Shri B.D.  Rao   Pharmacy   College   (Diploma),   Shri   B.D.   Rao  College   Campus,   Shri   B.D.   Rao   College  Page 6 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER Road,Khambhat­388620, Dist. Anand during the said  meeting.  

10. The   cases   of   46   students   of   2005­2006   and  cases   19   students   of   2007­2008   came   to   be  considered by the Executive Committee. 

11. The committee also took note of the fact that  the   concerned   institution,   i.e.   respondent   No.6  institute   is   closed   since   the   academic   session  2010­2011.  

12. The   minutes   of   the   meeting   records   the  decision of the Executive Committee, which reads  thus: 

"It   was   decided   to   recommend   to   Council   to   grant  approval to the D. Pharm course and examination u/s 12  of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 for 46 students for 2005­2006  and   19   students   for   2007­2008   academic   session   for  2007­2008 academic session as certified by the S.N.D.T.  Women's University, Mumbai without citing a precedence.  The list of students is enclosed as Appendix­I."

13. Thus, the Executive Committee has recommended  to the Council to grant approval to the D. Pharm.  course and the examinations held by the institute  Page 7 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER for 46 students for 2005­2006 and 19 students for  2007­2008 academic session.  

14. It   is   clarified   by   the   committee   that   the  said decision will not be cited as precedence.  

15. The list of the names of the students whose  cases   came   to   be   recommended/approved,   is  attached to the said minutes as Annexure­I. 

16. In   view   of   the   said   decision,   learned  advocates for the petitioners and the respondents  have jointly submitted that the names of all the  petitioners are included in the list attached to  the   said   minutes   which   are   forwarded   under   the  communication/order dated 14.8.2014. 

17. Ms.   Vyas,   learned   advocate   for   respondent  No.6   institute   submitted   that   actually   even   the  institute   has   placed   the   said  decision/communication  dated  14.8.2014  on record  of   this   petition   and   that   the   respondent   No.6  Page 8 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER institute has, probably, paid the requisite fees  as   mentioned   in   the   communication   dated  14.8.2014, however, if such fees is not paid,then  needful will be done and the fees will be paid at  the earliest. 

18. It is not in dispute that the annexure to the  decision/resolution   contains   the   names   of   the  petitioners. 

19. Learned   advocate   for   the   petitioners   also  confirmed  that  the  names  of the petitioners  are  included in the said list.  

20. In this view of the matter, learned advocates  for   the   petitioners   and   the   respondents   jointly  submitted   and   declared   that   in   view   of   and  pursuant   to   the   said   resolution/decision   dated  14.8.2014, the cause for continuing the petition  and prosecuting the petition does not survive and  the petitions may be disposed of accordingly. Page 9 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER

21. Learned   advocates   for   the   respondents,   more  particularly respondent No.6 institute, submitted  that   the   requisite   formalities,   which   are  required   to   be   completed   by   the   institute   and  other   concerned   persons,   will   be   completed   in  accordance with the said decision/resolution and  on   completion   of   such   formalities,   the  Registration   Certificate   may   be   issued   by   the  authority.

22. In this view of the matter, these petitions  are  disposed   of in light  of the  above­mentioned  statement   and   submissions   by   learned   advocates  for   the   petitioners   and   the   respondents   and   in  light   of   the   communication/decision   dated  14.8.2014   as   well   as   the   minutes   of   meeting  convened   on   13.7.2014,   these   petitions   are  disposed   of.     The   parties   shall   abide   by   the  submissions   and   statement   and   the  communication/decision   dated   14.8.2014   and   the  minutes of the meeting dated 13.7.2014. Page 10 of 11 C/SCA/3508/2014 ORDER

With   the   aforesaid   clarification,   the  petitions are disposed of.

Direct Service is permitted.

(K.M.THAKER, J.) Bharat Page 11 of 11