Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Allahabad High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. December

Dharma Devi Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur Thru. Manager Vikash Yadav vs. State of U.p. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Technical Education Lko. and 3 Others

Decided on 28 December 2024• Citation: WRIC/11478/2024• Allahabad High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                   Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:86568      
                Court No. - 13                                                    
                Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11478 of 2024                              
                Petitioner :- Dharma Devi Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur Thru. Manager    
                Vikash Yadav                                                      
                Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of     
                Technical Education Lko. And 3 Others                             
                Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Singh                       
                Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,D.K. Singh Chauhan,Ravi Singh    
                Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.                                           
                1. The matter has been taken up during the vacations on an application
                for urgency having been made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
                2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the prayer
                of the present petition forthwith.                                
                3. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri
                Rahul Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for State -
                respondent No.s 1 and 2, Sri Shishir Srivastava, Advocate holding 
                brief of Sri Ravi Singh for respondent No.3- Pharmacy Council of  
                India and Sri D. K. Singh Chauhan for respondent No.4- Joint      
                Entrance Examination Council (Polytechnic), Uttar Pradesh Guru    
                Gobind Singh Marg, Lucknow.                                       
                4. Petition has been filed challenging orders dated 6th December, 
                2024, 9th December, 2024 and 10th December, 2024 pertaining to    
                rejection of petitioner institutes' application for the D. Pharma course
                for the academic session 2024-25 by means of which the approval of
                the petitioners' institutes have been rejected.                   
                5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the  
                impugned order itself which indicates the date of meeting of the  

                executive council of the Pharmacy Council of India as 07th        
                November, 2024. He has thereafter adverted to the minutes of meeting
                held on 07th November, 2024, particularly paragraph 10.2 (c) thereof,
                whereby has been indicated that inspection was taking time and    
                around 346 institutions were yet to be inspected as on that date. He
                has thereafter drawn attention to the list appended to the resolution
                indicating name of petitioner institution for the D.Pharma course as
                one of the institutes for which the inspection was yet pending. Learned
                counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention to the direction
                issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 19th November, 2024 passed  
                in proceedings arising out of C.A. 9048 of 2012, Parshavanath     
                Charitable Trust and another vs. All India Council for Technical  
                Education and others, whereby directions have been issued to the  
                Pharmacy Council of India to decide cases where inspection has    
                already been conducted prior to cut off date so that institute can avail
                itself of an appellate remedy and further for direction to conduct
                inspections and make a decision before the cut off date where     
                inspection has already been conducted.                            
                6. Sri Shishir Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ravi Singh,
                learned counsel appearing for Pharmacy Council of India (PCI)     
                informs that rejection order dated 28.11.2024 was already uploaded on
                the website of Pharmacy Council of India but he is unable to produce
                any documentary evidence that the same was communicated to the    
                petitioner. He also does not dispute this fact that several orders have
                already been passed by this Court in the matters, in which rejection
                orders were communicated after some delay.                        
                7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident
                that the rejection order dated 28.11.2024 was uploaded on the website,
                but it was not communicated to the petitioner till today, therefore,
                alternative remedy of appeal could not be filed, which was to be  
                decided before the last date fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e.

                10.12.2024.                                                       
                8. Nonetheless, the fact still remains that the petitioner's application
                for approval was rejected by P.C.I. on 28.11.2024, but the same was
                not communicated to the petitioner till today. The last date fixed for
                taking decision on appeal is already lapsed. It is admitted between the
                parties that after approval is granted by PCI, an institute is required to
                seek affiliation by the Board of Technical Education whereafter only
                the institute can participate in the counselling process.         
                9. It is also admitted that last date fixed for grant of affiliation was
                also 14.12.2024, which has also in the meantime expired.          
                10. Learned counsel have adverted to order dated 13.12.2024 passed
                by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Parshavanath Charitable   
                Trust and another versus All India Council for Technical Education
                and others, Misc. Application bearing Diary No. 55173 of 2024 in  
                Civil Appeal No. 9048 of 2012 to submit that even after expiry of the
                last date fixed for purposes of approval by PCI, a letter dated   
                13.12.2024 issued by PCI praying for permission to convey right   
                decision and rectify and erroneous decision was filed whereafter  
                appropriate directions were also issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 
                Such a direction issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court is as follows:-  
                    "1. Learned counsel for the Pharmacy Council of India has placed a
                    letter dated 13.12.2024 praying for permission of this court to convey
                    the right decision and rectify an erroneous decision, which was taken
                    earlier.                                                      
                    2. Permission is granted.                                     
                    3. Needless to state that the permission granted by the Pharmacy
                    Council of India shall relate back to the date on which the earlier
                    incorrect order was passed.                                   
                    4. Insofar as the direction to the State Government to permit the
                    applicant(s) to admit the students concerned after the cut off date is

                    concerned, we direct the applicant(s) to make a representation to the
                    State Government, which would be considered on its own merits, in
                    accordance with law.                                          
                    5. These applications are accordingly disposed of.            
                    6. Pending applications(s), including application for intervention/
                    implementation, shall stand disposed of."                     
                11. It has further been pointed out that the matter was listed before the
                Hon'ble Supreme Court on 20.12.2024 where fresh decision taken by 
                the PCI was informed to the Court and it was submitted by them that
                they have considered and rectified the decision of all the applicant's
                colleges except few and further sought permission to rectify and  
                review decision on the applicant's colleges therein. The Hon'ble  
                Supreme Court considering the request made by the PCI permitted   
                them to grant permission in respect to other colleges wherever it has
                taken a decision to review and rectify earlier order              
                12. From the aforesaid order, it appears that PCI admitted before 
                Hon'ble Supreme Court that certain erroneous decisions had been   
                taken and a right to rectify such decisions have been sought, which
                was granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was also indicated in the
                order that in case such a rectified order is passed, it would relate back
                to the date on which earlier incorrect order was passed.          
                13. From the order, however, it is not discernible as to whether the
                letter dated 13.12.2024 was pertaining to only a single institute or was
                generally applicable. Learned counsel for PCI also does not have any
                instructions on that aspect.                                      
                14. However, in view of the arguments of learned counsel for PCI, as
                well as the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13.12.2024
                and 20.12.2024, liberty is granted to PCI to re-visit the case of 
                petitioner's institution with regard to grant of approval or otherwise for
                the Academic Session 2024-25 for conduct of D-Pharma Course in    

                case petitioner's institution would be covered by order dated     
                13.12.2024 and 20.12.2024 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court.        
                15. Consequential action may be taken by PCI, in accordance with  
                law.                                                              
                16. In consequence thereto, petitioner's institute would also be at
                liberty to seek consequential relief as granted by Hon'ble Supreme
                Court in the order dated 13.12.2024 & 20.12.2024.                 
                17. With the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of.   
                Order Date :- 28.12.2024                                          
                Gurpreet Singh/VKS                                                
    Digitally signed by :-                                                        
    VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA                                                        
    High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,                                        
    Lucknow Bench