Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kartavya And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 4 July, 2022
104.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-13196-2022
Date of Decision: 04.07.2022
KARTAVYA AND ANR .... Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present:- Mr. Imtiyaz Hussain, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
----
JAISHREE THAKUR.J (Oral)
The petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing the
present writ petition seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to be issued to
respondents No.4 and 5 to enter the name of the petitioners in the register of
Haryana State Pharmacy Council and to issue them licence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the
petitioners have done their pharmacy from recognized institutes which have
been duly recognized by the Pharmacy Council of India. It is submitted that
the petitioners have deposited all the documents and paid the prescribed fees
for registration, but till date nothing has been done by the Council. It is
further submitted that in similar matters, this Court in Sajid Khan and
another Vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.1881 of 2022, decided
on 03.02.2022 and in Warish Vs. State of Haryana, CWP No.21604 of 2021,
decided on 27.10.2021, had permitted the petitioners therein to submit the
1 of 3
requisite fee through demand draft as well as the affidavit giving details of
the institutions where the petitioners therein had studied and acquired the
pharmacy degree and directed the respondents therein to register them on the
roll of the Council and to issue necessary certificates, in case their degrees
were found to be genuine.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
petitioners have submitted various representations which are annexed with
this petition at Annexure P-6 (colly) to the Haryana State Pharmacy Council
i.e. respondents No.4 and 5 ventilating their grievance but no action has been
taken thereon so far. It is further submitted that the petitioners would be
satisfied if their representations (dated 02.10.2021 submitted by petitioner
No.1-Kartavya and dated 15.02.2022 submitted by petitioner No.2-Sunil
Kumar) are considered and decided by respondents No.4 and 5 in a time
bound manner, in terms of the judgments passed by this Court in the cases of
Sajid Khan and Waris, as referred to above.
Notice of motion to respondents No.1, 2, 4 and 5 only.
Ms. Kirti Singh, DAG, Haryana and Mr. Gopal Sharma,
Advocate, who are present in Court, accept notice for respondents No.1 and
2 as well as respondents No.4 and 5 respectively. Learned counsel appearing
for respondents No.4 and 5 submits that respondents No.4 and 5 will look
into the matter and take a decision in accordance with law.
Let sufficient number of copies of the complete paper book be
supplied the counsel appearing for the respondents during the course of day.
Without commenting on merits of the case, I dispose of the
instant petition by directing respondents No.4 and 5 to consider the
2 of 3
representations (dated 02.10.2021 submitted by petitioner No.1-Kartavya and
dated 15.02.2022 submitted by petitioner No.2-Sunil Kumar) and take a
decision thereon, in terms of judgments passed by this Court in the cases of
Sajid Khan and Waris, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order and convey the result thereof to the petitioners,
failing which the officer responsible for the lapse would be liable to deposit
costs of Rs.20,000/- from his personal pocket with the Punjab and Haryana
High Court Advocates Welfare Fund.
(JAISHREE THAKUR)
04.07.2022 JUDGE
sanjeev
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
