The insistence on an Essentiality Certificate by the University is unjustified as the Pharmacy Act's regulations prioritize the Pharmacy Council's approval over state requirements.

ORDER :

(VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.)

This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 20/11/2024, and direct the first respondent to grant consent of affiliation to the petitioner College to start additional course namely M.Pharm (Pharmaceutics) and Pharm D courses, for the academic year 2025 – 26 without insisting on Essentiality Certificate from the Government.

2. The writ petitioner is running “Tagore College of Pharmacy”, which is a recognized institution. They have started the College of Pharmacy to conduct B Pharmacy course with an annual intake of 60 students. They have applied with necessary documents for the consent of affiliation of the first respondent to commence additional courses namely M.Pharm (Pharmaceutics) and Pharm D courses for the academic year 2025 – 2026. The first respondent took a stand that the petitioner must obtain the Government order and only after submission of the same, the petitioner's request will be processed. Challenging the stand of the first respondent University as reflected in the impugned communication dated 20/11/2024, the present writ petition came to be filed.

3. Heard Mr.M.Deivanandam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.G.Arumugam, Standing counsel for the first respondent, Mr.M.T.Arunan, learned counsel for the second respondent and Mr.E.Sundaram, learned Government Advocate for the third respondent.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order and grant relief as prayed for.

5. The learned standing counsel for the first respondent would submit that they have no role in the matter as of now and that only after the Government gives green signal, they would process the petitioner's application.

6. After carefully considering the contentions made on either side, it is clear that the issue is no longer res integra. A learned Judge of this Court vide order dated 10.11.2020 in W.P.No.14834 of 2020 ( PGP Educational and Welfare Society Vs. The Registrar T.N.Dr.M.G.R Medical University ) had held as follows:-

“20. If the Pharmacy Council of India insists for Prior Approval or No Objection Certificate from the State Government, the Scheme shows that the same is insisted even while submitting the documents to the Pharmacy Council of India which thereafter considers the application for approval by taking note of the permission granted by the State Government. There is no question of seeking for an approval/ permission from the State Government after the approval is already granted by the Pharmacy Council of India. It will be like putting the cart before the Horse and it does not fall within the Scheme framed by the Pharmacy Council of India under the Regulations.

21.The Government Order that was brought to the notice of this Court in G.O.Ms.No.148 dt. 24.04.2018, cannot outweigh the Regulations of the Pharmacy Council of India and it has to necessarily give way to the Regulations which governs the field. Just because some other Institutions have obtained the permission of the State Government after getting approval for additional intake, the same cannot be insisted upon in every case in the absence of any power or jurisdiction available to the State Government and the University.

22.In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the Scheme framed under the Regulations by the Pharmacy Council of India does not contemplate any permission from the State Government after approval is granted by the Pharmacy