Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Bhartiya Shikshan And Vikas Samiti vs State Of Rajasthan Through Its ... on 5 September, 2018
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Goverdhan Bardhar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1030/2018
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17293/2018
Bhartiya Shikshan and Vikas Samiti Dholakheda, Udaipurwati,
District Jhunjhunu through its President Vidhyadhar Singh son of
Shri Ratna Ram, Aged 62 years, Resident of Indrapura, Tehsil
Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu.
.......Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through its Principal Secretary,
Department of Medical Education, Government of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Rajasthan University of Health Science, Kumbha Marg, Pratap
Nagar, Jaipur through its Registrar.
3. The Convener, Pharmacy Counseling Board, 2018, SMS
Medical College, Jaipur.
....Respondents.
4. All India Council for Technical Education, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi through its Member Secretary.
5. Pharmacy Council of India, Combined Councils Building, Kotla Road, New Delhi-110002 through its Registrar.
-Proforma Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vijay Poonia.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Gupta, AAG and Mr. Dinesh
Yadav.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR
Judgment
05/09/2018
(Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq)
This special appeal seeks to challenge order dated 10.08.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby prayer of the appellant-writ petitioner for issuing direction to Respondent No. 3, the Convener, Pharmacy Counseling Board to include its name in the counseling for admission of the students to the course of Diploma in Pharmacy for Academic Session 2018-19, (2 of 6) [SAW-1030/2018] has been declined and S. B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 13856/2018 filed by the appellant in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17293/2018 has been dismissed.
Mr. Vijay Poonia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant, Bhartiya Shikshan and Vikas Samiti, Dholakheda, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu moved an application before respondent-State Government for grant of No Objection Certificate (for short 'NOC') for starting new course of Diploma in Pharmacy. The appellant also moved an application before All India Council for Technical Education (for short 'AICTE') seeking approval to start Diploma Course in Pharmacy from Academic Session 2018-19. The State Government issued Letter of Intent to the appellant-society on 18.06.2018, but Rajasthan University of Health Sciences rejected application of the appellant for grant of affiliation for admission on 20.02.2018 on the premise that NOC of the State Government has not been submitted along with the application. However, AICTE subsequently issued letter of approval to the appellant-society on 30.04.2018. Pharmacy Council of India, by virtue of its decision taken in the meeting of its Executive Committee, also granted approval for Diploma Course in Pharmacy to the institute of the appellant-society on 31.05.2018 with intake of 60 students for Academic Session 2018-
19. However, despite repeated reminders, the State Government did not issue NOC, even though the last date for grant or refusal of NOC by the State Government/the University has been fixed as 15th May in the calendar, as per judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Others, (2013) 3 (3 of 6) [SAW-1030/2018] SCC 385. It is therefore argued that the learned Single Judge erred in law by not directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society for allotment of students by the Convenor, Pharmacy Council Board.
Learned counsel further submitted that even though in the aforesaid calendar, 1st August has been fixed for commencement of session, but in the same calendar, 15 th August has been fixed as the date up to which students can be admitted against the vacancies arising due to any reason. The time schedule laid down by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others (supra) will be binding upon AICTE, Pharmacy Council of India or the State Government, but this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not bound by the aforesaid time schedule. Learned counsel, in support of this argument, relied upon the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Irinjalakuda Diocesan Educational Trust Kodakara, Thrissur Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Others, (Writ Petition (c) No. 13969/2015 (U) decided on 11.06.2015), especially the observations made in para no. 15 and 16 of the Report, in which the Kearla High Court held that aforesaid direction does not take within its ambit the Constitutional Courts namely the High Courts, which exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of Delhi High Court in Jamia Hamdard (Deemed University) Vs. Union of India & Another (Writ Petition (c) No. 5941/2015 decided on 20.08.2015) and order dated 17.08.2018 passed by the Supreme Court in Yogendra Nath Saxena College of (4 of 6) [SAW-1030/2018] Pharmacy and Research Centre Vs. Dr. A.P. Abdul Kalam Technical University & Others, (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 938 of 2018) to argue that so far as this Court is concerned, there is no impediment for passing interim order, directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society in the seat matrix of the Pharmacy Council of India for allotment of students for Academic Session 2018-19. It is also argued that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Others, (2006) 9 SCC 1 and Jaya Gokul Educational Trust Vs. Commissioner & Secretary to Government Higher Education Department, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, (2000) 5 SCC 231, the State Government has no role to play in the matter and it is the AICTE, which is ultimate authority to decided for approval of the intake. Since AICTE granted approval to the appellant- institute on 30.04.2018 and Pharmacy Council of India granted approval on 31.05.2018, the State Government was not justified in withholding NOC, particularly when it had issued Letter of Intent in favor of the appellant on 18.06.2018.
Mr. S.K. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents-State and Mr. Dinesh Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences opposed the special appeal and submitted that the appellant-institute in the present case was granted approval by AICTE on 30.04.2018 and Pharmacy Council of India on 31.05.2018, the letter of intent was issued by the State Government as recently as 18.06.2018. Taking note of the delay aforesaid, the State Government issued NOC in favour of the (5 of 6) [SAW-1030/2018] appellant-institute vide order dated 08.08.2018 for Academic Session 2019-20 and not for Academic Session 2018-19. Learned Additional Advocate General, in this connection, referred to observations made by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others (supra), especially to para 41, according to which first round of counseling/admission for allotment of seats has to be completed on or before 30 th June; second round of counseling/admission has to be completed on or before 10th July and last round of counseling has to be completed on or before 20th July; last date for admitting candidates in seats other than allotted above shall be 30 th July. Academic session has to commence from 1st August; last date up to which students can be admitted against vacancies arising due to any reason has been indicated to be 15th August with clear stipulation that no student should be admitted in any institution after the last date under any quota. In that very time schedule, last date for granting or refusing approval by AICTE has been indicated to be 10 th April and last date for granting or refusing approval by University/State Government has been fixed as 15th May. This has been further reiterated by the Supreme Court in Para 42 of the Report by specifically observing that all the seats should be filled positively by 15th August, after which there shall be no admission, whatever be the reason or ground. Since both the aforesaid dates had gone by, the State Government was fully justified in granting NOC to the appellant-institute for Academic Session 2019-20.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find that approval in favour of the appellant-institute was (6 of 6) [SAW-1030/2018] granted by AICTE on 30.04.2018 and by Pharmacy Council of India on 31.05.2018. Letter of Intent was issued by the State Government to the appellant recently on 18.06.2018. Owing to the delay aforesaid, the State Government issued NOC on 08.08.2018 for Academic Session 2019-20 only. Learned Single Judge therefore cannot be said to be unjustified in not directing inclusion of name of the appellant-institute for allotment of the students by passing interim order particularly when it has been noted that writ petition was filed only on 04.08.2018, i.e. after delay of two months, after grant of approval by Pharmacy Council of India on 31.05.2018. We are not inclined to concur with the view taken by Kerala High Court in Irinjalakuda Diocesan Educational Trust Kodakara, Thrissur (supra), that the time schedule laid down by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others (supra), would not be binding upon this Court, as by laying down the aforesaid time schedule, the Supreme Court requires adherence to the academic discipline with specific emphasis that all the seats should be filled positively by 15 th August, after which there shall be no admission, whatever be the reason or ground.
In view of above, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. There is no merit in this special appeal, which is hereby dismissed.
Stay Application No. 14857/2018 also stands dismissed.
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J
Manoj
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)