Delhi High Court - Orders
Vighnaharta Institute Of Pharmacy vs Pharmacy Council Of India on 26 May, 2023
Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7429/2023
VIGHNAHARTA INSTITUTE OF PHARMACY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat and Mr. Ashok
Kumar, Advocates
Versus
PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Mobashshir Sarwar, Standing
Counsel alongwith Dr. Swaroop George, Mr.
Akshat Gupta and Mr. Tanmay Cheema,
Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
ORDER
% 26.05.2023
1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-institution submits that the impugned decision dated 11.05.2023 passed by the Executive Committee of the respondent-Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) is illegal and improper and the same has been passed without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. According to learned counsel for the petitioner-institution, against the order of rejection of its application for the permission for D-Pharm course, the petitioner-institution filed an appeal. On being heard in appeal, the grievance of the petitioner was mitigated and the matter was remitted back to the executive committee for its fresh decision. He, then submits that in terms of the impugned decision dated 11.05.2023, two deficiencies were noted by the executive committee without hearing the petitioner-institution.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:22:08 -2-
2. According to him, had the petitioner-institution been given a proper opportunity of hearing, the petitioner-institution would have satisfied the respondent-PCI that salary details were not required to be submitted as the petitioner-institution has not yet started operating and the experience certificate of the Principal etc. would have been released. He also submits that the proper explanation with respect to the platform not being available in the machine room would have also been presented before the executive committee.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-PCI, on advance instructions, submits that once the deficiencies have been noted, the matter does not require any reconsideration. According to him, the petitioner-institution was under an obligation to keep the entire infrastructure in place before the inspection was carried out or the decision was taken. He supports the decision taken by the executive committee.
4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
5. It is seen that in the decision dated 11.05.2023, the respondent-PCI in its 395th Executive Committee meeting has noted two deficiencies, which read as under:-
"Subject: Decision of 395 EC (11.05.2023)
----------
Sir/Madam With reference to the subject cited above. I am directed to convey the decisions of 395 Executive Committee of the PCI held on 11.05.2023, which decided as under:-
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:22:08 -3- Institution's Name and Examining Authority Decision of 395 EC ID (11.05.2023) The Registrar Vighnaharta Institute Maharashtra State D.Pharm: Reject of Pharmacy Board of Technical Education Kherwadi It was noted that 1188/2, Bandra East Mumbai institution has failed to provide facilities as per Nashik Road, Patane, statutory provisions of Malegaon, Nashik,
- Minimum Maharashtra Qualification for PCI-5862 Teachers in Pharmacy D.Pharm Institutions Regulations, 2014.
-Education Regulations, 1991/2020 for the Diploma course in Pharmacy.
In view of above, it was
decided to reject the
application for
D.Pharm course.
1. Salary details were
not shown and
experience letter of the
principal was not
proper and needs to be
verified.
2. No platform were
available in the
machine room.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:22:08 -4-
6. It is also seen that before the impugned decision was taken, there was no communication to the petitioner-institution to explain the aforesaid deficiencies. It is thus seen that had the appropriate notice being given to the petitioner-institution, the petitioner-institution would have submitted an explanation and the decision would not have arrived at. It is for this reason, this court at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to set aside the decision dated 11.05.2023 and remits the matter back to the Executive Committee for its fresh consideration.
7. The petition is disposed of with the following directions:-
(i) The impugned decision dated 11.05.2023 is set aside.
(ii) The petitioner-institution shall submit the necessary explanation on the basis of deficiencies noted therein within seven days alongwith necessary documents.
(iii) The respondent-PCI shall consider the case of the petitioner-
institution afresh in accordance with applicable regulations, expeditiously, in any case before 30.06.2023.
8. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- PCI, however, submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Parshavanath Charitable Trust v. All India Council for Tech. Edu &Ors.2 has extended the last date for grant of approval till 30.08.2023. Therefore, in this case, the last date for taking the decision be extended till 30.08.2023.
2(2013) 3 SCC 385 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:22:09 -5-
9. The submissions made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-PCI is opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-institution and he submits that this is the second round of litigation.
10. According to him, he had earlier availed the appeal mechanism and the impugned decision was taken after being remanded to the Executive Committee, still violating the principles of natural justice. He apprehends that if this court fixes the cut off date to take the decision as 30.08.2023 and in case the respondent-PCI decide to reject the petitioner's application, the petitioner-institution would not be in a position to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law and his substantial rights would adversely be affected.
11. Keeping in mind the background of the instant case, this court is not inclined to extend the date for taking up the final decision upto 31.08.2023 and instead direct the respondent-PCI to take the final decision by 30.06.2023, so that in case the petitioner-institution will have any grievance, the petitioner-institution would be in a position to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law.
12. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J MAY 26, 2023 p'ma This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:22:09