Allahabad High Court
Dr.A.K.Pandey College Of ... vs State Of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. ... on 11 June, 2021
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 19
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 11370 of 2021
Petitioner :- Dr.A.K.Pandey College Of Pharmacy Thru.Rajeev Prakash Pandey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Technical Education & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharm Raj Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Illegible,Ravi Singh
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Counter affidavit filed by opposite party is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties 1 and 3 and Mr. Ravi Singh learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
The petition has been filed against order dated 11.5.2021 purportedly passed pursuant to directions of this Court dated 17.03.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.21041 (M/S) of 2021 (Dr. A.K. Pandey College Of Pharmacy v. State Of U.P. & Ors.).
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner-institution had applied for conducting the course in D.Pharma for the Academic Session 2019-20 after establishing the required infrastructure etc. and had applied for approval from the Pharmacy Council of India. It is stated that the approval was granted on 10.06.2019. However, the petitioner-institution was unable to conduct the course for the Academic Sessions 2019-20 and 2020-21. Application for extension of approval for the Academic Session 2021-22 was rejected on the ground that petitioner could not submit the approval within the stipulated time and, therefore, the permission for conducting the course for the Academic Session 2021-22 was rejected against which the petitioner filed aforesaid writ petition which was partly allowed by means of judgment and order dated 17.03.2021 with following observations:-
"In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice can be served by directing the petitioner to move a fresh representation along with requisite enclosure including the compliance(s) before the respondent no.2 within ten days from today raising all the grievances. In case if such representation is made before the respondent no.2, the same shall be considered and decided by the PCI after providing an opportunity to the petitioner by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two weeks thereafter. It is made clear that the respondent no.2 shall take a decision strictly in accordance with law and this Court has only examined the veracity of the order impugned but in so far as the compliance and approvals are concerned it shall be open to the PCI to take an independent decision.
In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 6th of October, 2020 contained in annexure no.2 in so far as it relates to the petitioner's institution and the communication contained in annexure no.7 are set aside.
Subject to the direction given above, the writ petition is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs."
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner's application for conducting the course for Academic Session 2021-22 has been rejected by means of the impugned order, which is not in terms of the directions issued by this Court since the submissions of petitioner-institution has not been considered at all and the impugned rejection order has been passed in a completely cursory manner.
Mr. Ravi Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 submits that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Pharmacy Council of India and in paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed by Ms. Archna Mudgal, Registrar-cum-Secretary of the Council, it has been submitted that the impugned order dated 11.05.2021 is being withdrawn and fresh orders would be passed in compliance of this Court's order dated 17.03.2021 after placing the matter again before the Executive Committee. Mr. Ravi Singh has further informed that in pursuance thereof, the Council has already passed a fresh order dated 5.6.2021 which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the counter affidavit.
Looking to the facts and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that by means of the impugned order dated 11.05.2021, the representation of petitioner has been rejected in a completely cursory manner without adhering to the directions issued by this Court vide judgment and order dated 17.03.2021.
In view of the fact that the impugned order dated 11.05.2021 has already been withdrawn by the Council itself, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that the Council is directed to take a fresh decision with regard to the petitioner's application in accordance with the directions of this Court and ignoring the second order dated 05.06.2021, which has also been passed without any authority of law.
In view of aforesaid, there is no occasion to quash the order impugned dated 11.05.2021 since it has already been withdrawn by the Council itself.
Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed with a direction to the Pharmacy Council of India, opposite party no.2 to take a fresh decision on the representation of petitioner dated 28.03.2021 with regard to petitioner-institution's application for conduct of the Pharmacy Course for the Academic Session 2021-22 strictly in accordance with the directions issued by this Court in the judgment and order dated 17.03.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.21041 (M/S) of 2021.
Opposite party no.3 Board of Technical Education U.P. Lucknow may also take a decision with regard to issuance of letter of consent to petitioner for the Academic Session 2021-22 since the proceedings for grant of approval etc. are to be completed within a period of two weeks from the date a copy this order is furnished before the authorities concerned.
Order Date :- 11.6.2021
kvg/-
