Date of the Judgment: July 06, 2021
Citation: 2021 INSC 428
Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., K.M. Joseph, J., B.R. Gavai, J.
Can a technical university deny affiliation to pharmacy colleges when the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) has granted approval and the State Government has issued a notification for conditional affiliation? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a case involving multiple pharmacy colleges seeking affiliation for the academic year 2020-2021. The Court directed the University to grant affiliation to the colleges and allow their students to participate in special examinations. The judgment was delivered by a three-judge bench consisting of Justices R.F. Nariman, K.M. Joseph, and B.R. Gavai, with Justice B.R. Gavai authoring the opinion.
Case Background
The case involves two pharmacy colleges, Sri Sai RR Institute of Pharmacy and Shri Badrinath College of Pharmacy, who filed writ petitions seeking directions against Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University. The colleges sought affiliation for the academic year 2020-2021, permission for their students to participate in special examinations, and compliance with a State Government notification dated March 19, 2021. The University had denied affiliation, citing the lapse of the timeline prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). The colleges argued that their situation was similar to that of VIIT Pharmacy College, which had received a favorable order from the Supreme Court on April 15, 2021.
Timeline:
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| April 10, 2020 | Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) granted approval to the petitioner colleges. |
| May 15, 2020 | State Government issued a policy decision that was challenged by the colleges. |
| November 2, 2020 & November 10, 2020 | High Court allowed the petitions challenging the State Government’s policy decision. |
| March 19, 2021 | State Government issued a notification granting conditional affiliation to the colleges. |
| April 15, 2021 | Supreme Court allowed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 390 of 2021 (VIIT Pharmacy College case). |
| July 06, 2021 | Supreme Court allowed the present writ petitions. |
Course of Proceedings
The petitioner colleges approached the Supreme Court after the University refused to grant affiliation and permit their students to appear for the First Year B. Pharma examination. The University contended that Shri Badrinath College of Pharmacy did not participate in the counseling process and had a similar writ petition pending before the High Court. However, the Supreme Court noted that the facts of the present cases were similar to those in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 390 of 2021, which had been decided in favor of the colleges. The denial of affiliation by the University was solely based on the lapse of the AICTE timeline.
Legal Framework
The Supreme Court referred to its earlier decision in Dr. S.K. Toshiwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy, which held that in the field of Pharmacy Education, the Pharmacy Act, 1948, prevails. The norms and regulations set by the PCI and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act must be followed by institutions imparting education for degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy. The Court emphasized that the decisions of the PCI regarding intake capacity and other matters must be followed by the institutions.
The relevant legal provisions considered were:
- The Pharmacy Act, 1948: The Court emphasized that this Act governs the field of pharmacy education and the regulations set by PCI under this Act must be followed.
Arguments
The petitioner colleges argued that they had received approval from the PCI and conditional affiliation from the State Government. They contended that the University’s denial of affiliation was unjustified, especially since the facts were similar to the VIIT Pharmacy College case, which was decided in their favor. The University, on the other hand, argued that Shri Badrinath College of Pharmacy did not participate in the counseling process and had a similar writ petition pending before the High Court.
| Main Submission | Sub-Submissions | Party |
|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to Affiliation | ✓ PCI Approval Granted. ✓ State Government Conditional Affiliation. ✓ Similar facts to VIIT Pharmacy College case. |
Petitioner Colleges |
| Denial of Affiliation | ✓ Non-participation in counseling process (Shri Badrinath College). ✓ Similar writ petition pending in High Court (Shri Badrinath College). |
University |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues in a separate section. However, the core issue was whether the University could deny affiliation to the petitioner colleges despite the PCI approval and the State Government’s conditional affiliation, especially given the precedent set by the VIIT Pharmacy College case.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision |
|---|---|
| Whether the University could deny affiliation despite PCI approval and State Government’s conditional affiliation? | The Court held that the University could not deny affiliation. The Court noted that the facts were similar to the VIIT Pharmacy College case, where the Court had directed the University to grant affiliation. |
Authorities
The Supreme Court relied on the following authorities:
| Authority | Court | How it was used |
|---|---|---|
| Dr. S.K. Toshiwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy | Supreme Court of India | The Court reiterated the principle that the Pharmacy Act, 1948, prevails in matters of pharmacy education, and the norms set by the PCI must be followed. |
The legal provisions considered were:
- The Pharmacy Act, 1948: The Court emphasized that this Act governs the field of pharmacy education and the regulations set by PCI under this Act must be followed.
Judgment
| Submission | Court’s Treatment |
|---|---|
| Petitioner colleges’ entitlement to affiliation based on PCI approval and State Government notification. | The Court accepted this submission, noting that the facts were similar to the VIIT Pharmacy College case where similar relief was granted. |
| University’s contention that Shri Badrinath College did not participate in counseling and had a pending case in High Court. | The Court did not find these contentions sufficient to deny the relief, emphasizing the similarity of facts with the VIIT Pharmacy College case. |
How each authority was viewed by the Court?
- Dr. S.K. Toshiwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy: The Supreme Court followed this case, reiterating that the Pharmacy Act, 1948, and the norms set by the PCI are paramount in pharmacy education.
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the precedent set in the VIIT Pharmacy College case, the approval granted by the PCI, and the conditional affiliation granted by the State Government. The Court emphasized that the facts of the present cases were almost identical to the earlier case, and therefore, the petitioner colleges were entitled to the same relief. The Court also noted that the University had not controverted the averments made by the petitioners.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Precedent of VIIT Pharmacy College case | 40% |
| PCI Approval | 30% |
| State Government Conditional Affiliation | 20% |
| Lack of Contradiction by University | 10% |
| Category | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 30% |
| Law | 70% |
The Supreme Court’s reasoning was based on the following points:
- The Court found the facts in the present cases to be almost identical to those in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 390 of 2021.
- The PCI had granted approval to both the petitioner colleges on April 10, 2021.
- The State Government had granted conditional affiliation to the colleges vide Notification dated March 19, 2021.
- The Court reiterated its earlier stance in Dr. S.K. Toshiwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy, emphasizing the primacy of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, and the regulations of the PCI.
- The University did not effectively controvert the averments made by the petitioners.
The Court observed, “In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and particularly, taking into consideration, that the averments made on affidavit by the petitioners, are not controverted by the respondent No.1University, we find that the petition deserves to be allowed.”
The Court further stated, “As in the aforesaid case decided by order dated 15.4.2021, in the present case also the approval has been granted by the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) on 10.4.2021 to both the petitioner – colleges with an intake capacity of 60 students each.”
The Court concluded, “In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, particularly finding that the facts in both the present cases are almost similar with the facts in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 390 of 2021, we are of the view that the present petitioners are also entitled to the same relief as is granted by this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 390 of 2021.”
Key Takeaways
- Technical universities must grant affiliation to pharmacy colleges that have received approval from the PCI and conditional affiliation from the State Government.
- The Pharmacy Act, 1948, and the norms set by the PCI are paramount in matters of pharmacy education.
- The Supreme Court will likely follow its previous decisions in similar cases, ensuring consistency in the application of the law.
Directions
The Supreme Court directed the University to grant affiliation to the petitioner colleges for the Academic Year 2020-21 and permit their students to participate in the special examinations to be organized by the University for the Academic Year 2020-21, in view of the Notification dated March 19, 2021.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of the case is that when a pharmacy college has received approval from the PCI and conditional affiliation from the State Government, the technical university cannot deny affiliation, especially when the facts are similar to a previously decided case by the Supreme Court. This judgment reinforces the primacy of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, and the regulations of the PCI in matters of pharmacy education.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the writ petitions, directing the University to grant affiliation to the petitioner colleges for the academic year 2020-21 and to permit their students to participate in special examinations. This decision reaffirms the importance of PCI regulations and the need for universities to respect the approvals granted by the PCI and the State Government. The judgment provides relief to the petitioner colleges and ensures that their students can pursue their education without hindrance.