MGM Silver Jubilee College of Polytechnic and Pharmaceutical Sciences v. Pharmacy Council of India; Cochin College of Engineering and Technology v. Pharmacy Council of India

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY`** ## **`WEDNESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1944`** ## **`WP(C) NO. 5571 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` MGM SILVER JUBILEE COLLEGE OF POLYTECHNIC AND PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES PAMPAKUDA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 667, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PIN - 686667 BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE ANN MARIA FRANCIS GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1THE PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA COMBINES COUNCIL'S BUILDING TEMPLE LANE, ROTLE, NEW DELHI-110 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR 2THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION MEDICAL COLLEGE, KUMARAPURAM ROAD, CHALAKKUZHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011 BY ADV S.MANU SMT. MINI GOPINATH, CGC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.03.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).5419/2023, THE COURT ON 15.03.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -2- # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 15[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1944 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 5419 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` COCHIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ATHIPPATTA, EDAYUR P.O., VALANCHERY VIA, MALAPPURAM, PIN- 676 552, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ``` ``` BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE ANN MARIA FRANCIS GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1THE PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA COMBINES COUNCIL'S BUILDING TEMPLE LANE, ROTLE, NEW DELHI-110 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR 2THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION MEDICAL COLLEGE, KUMARAPURAM ROAD, CHALAKKUZHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695011, PIN – 695011 ``` ``` BY ADV S.MANU SMT. MINI GOPINATH, CGC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.03.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).5571/2023, THE COURT ON 15.03.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -3- ## **JUDGMENT** The writ petitions are filed by two Private Self-Financing Pharmacy colleges challenging the order of the Pharmacy Council of India (hereinafter PCI for short) declining approval for the academic session 2022-2023 for D.Pharm Course with a rider that the petitioners are free to apply for the next academic session 2023-2024, evident from Ext.P12 and Ext.P12 order of the PCI dated 10.02.2023 and 13.02.2023 respectively. The contentions raised by the petitioners are basically common in nature and therefore, separate narration of facts are not required. The basic contention advanced by the petitioners is that the rejection of the approval by the PCI for conduct of D.Pharm courses on the ground that time schedule fixed by the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath Charitable Trust and Others v. All India Council for Technical Education and Others [2013 (3) SCC 385]**_ would not apply to the D.Pharm courses. Therefore, it is contended that despite the cut off date prescribed in the judgment in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), every applications were considered by the PCI. It is further contended that the said aspect ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -4- was brought to the notice of this Court in the earlier round, and it was accordingly that directions were issued by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the common Judgment in W.P.(C)Nos.38755/2022 and 38790/2022 dated 8.12.2022; to the PCI to take up all the contentions of the petitioners and consider the same on its merits based on the inspection conducted or to be conducted by them in terms of law; and consequential directions to the State officials to include in the list of colleges the petitioners also, for students to seek admission, if the PCI grants approval to the D.Pharm Course. It is further submitted that despite the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge, the PCI rejected the application, which is illegal and arbitrary. It is also the contention of the petitioners that they have submitted an application for approval much earlier, but saying one reason or the other, the approval was not granted by the PCI. It is also submitted that the consent of affiliation from the examining authority is not a prerequisite to be submitted by the applicants for approval under Section 12 of Pharmacy Council of India Act. It is also pointed out that the applications were preferred for the academic year 2022-2023 within ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -5- the time schedule as updated by the PCI through various circulars and in their website. It is further submitted that the petitioners have the requisite infrastructure, and also satisfy all the mandates required by law to conduct D.Pharm course, which was ratified by the PCI in its inspection of the campuses. It is also contended that the PCI overlooked the directions contained in the judgment rendered by a learned Single judge of this Court dated 08.12.2022, and therefore, the orders of the PCI have to be interfered with on that sole ground. It is also submitted that the order rejecting the applications are drafted with lot of errors and the same is issued without applying mind. That apart, it is contended that even though the cut off date was prescribed, the PCI had considered several applications thereafter and therefore, certain colleges are placed on different pedestal, which is arbitrary and illegal. 2. The PCI has filed an affidavit justifying the stand adopted by it in rejecting the approval consequent to the directions contained in the judgment of the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), wherein it is held that, the order granting or refusing approval should be passed by the 10[th] April of the relevant year; that the appeal should be filed within one W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 week, and the Appellate Committee should hear the appeal and decide the same by 30[th] April of the relevant year, and that the University should grant/decline the approval/affiliation by 15[th] May of the relevant year; and advertisement should be issued and entrance examination conducted positively by the end of the month of May. Therefore, it is contended that the judgment in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) clearly prescribes a time line that has to be followed by the statutory councils as well as the Universities and the admission process for both pharmacy and technical courses. That apart, it is contended that the deadline prescribed in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) is applicable to all the pharmacy courses, as time and again, on the application of the PCI, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to extend the time schedule, which is evident from the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also submitted that from the year 2020-2021 academic session, moratorium was applicable for opening of new institutions in all States, where the number of pharmacy colleges were 15 or more than 15, and the PCI in this regard had uploaded circulars dated 17.07.2019 and 09.09.2019 on its website. It is also pointed out that various institutions challenged the W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 same in various High Courts; and Delhi High Court by judgment dated 07.03.2022, had quashed the circulars. In the SLP filed by the PCI against the above order, the Apex Court as per its judgment dated 31.05.2022, has directed the PCI to open a portal for new institutions. Therefore, the contentions advanced is that the institutions which are given approval after the time fixed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court are new institutions applied during 2022-2023 as per the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. As time was short to complete the approval process for considering all new institutions, PCI had filed applications seeking extension of time before the Apex Court with a prayer that applications received in respect of new institutions will be considered for 2023-2024 academic sessions. It is also submitted that certain colleges were already approved by the PCI for conduct of D.Pharm courses for the academic session 2021-2022, which are already existing institutions and submitted all required documents at the time of submission of application online in the portal of the PCI. Therefore, as per the order dated 30.12.2022 of the Delhi High Court, PCI has considered the said case. So also it is submitted that, cases filed before various High Courts ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -8- were against rejection of the application on the grounds of deficiency of infrastructure, teaching faculties and other facilities, and in most of the cases, initial reason for rejection of the applications were for want of No Objection Certificate from the State Governments. In such cases filed before the Apex Court, in W.P.(C)No.888/2022, the Apex Court by order dated 21.10.2022, directed the PCI to take decision on the applications for grant of approval prior to 15.11.2022, and other consequential directions were issued. The said order of the Apex Court dated 21.10.2022 is produced as Annexure R1(b). Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention advanced is that, in the said case there was NOC and consent of affiliation from the State Governments and Universities or Boards concerned. It is further pointed out that, the PCI, in some of the existing institutions where judicial orders passed and satisfied the requirements were considered post 30.11.2022, for the reasons specified above. But, certainly, not after 30.12.2022, the last date fixed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for admission. Apart from the above, it is submitted that both the petitioners have applied to the PCI for approval of the D.Pharm course for the academic session 2023-2024, ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 and from the perusal of that, it appears that petitioners have still not submitted required documents, and if all the documents are produced, the case of the petitioners would be considered for the academic session 2023-2024. 3. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Sri. George Poonthottam assisted by Adv. Ann Maria Francis, and the learned Central Government Counsel Smt. Mini Gopinath, and perused the pleadings and material on record. 4. The sole question to be considered is whether any interference is required to the impugned orders passed by the PCI on the ground that the time limit prescribed by the Apex Court in the judgment in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) has expired . The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the directions contained in the judgment in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) is only in respect of the B.Pharm courses and that too when the approval was granted at a time when the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) was granting approval. It is further pointed out that the judgment in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) applies only to the University, and Colleges which are affiliated to the W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -10- Universities and in the instant case for D.Pharm course, no such affiliation is required. 5. However, the learned CGC submitted that the directions contained in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) make it explicit that the grant or refusal of approval and admission schedule shall be strictly adhered to by all the authorities concerned including AICTE, the University, the State Government and any other authority directly or indirectly connected with the grant of approval and affiliation. 6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has invited my attention to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in _**Irinjalakuda Diocesan Educational Trust v. All India Council for Technical Education and others**_ dated 11.06.2015 in W.P. (C)No.13969/2015, wherein, the judgment of the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) was taken into consideration and held as follows at paragraph 15. “This Court is inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Hon’ble Supreme Court ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -11- has cautiously and carefully refrained from prohibiting such interventions by the Courts. The persons or authority referred to in the afore-cited directions does not take within its ambit the High Courts which exercise jurisdiction under Article 226. The direction at item No.(6) above also would indicate that it is to keep the AICTE and the authorities, exercising jurisdiction with respect to grant of approval of institutions and to keep them within the bounds of the schedule that such direction has been issued; as to avoid any allegation of caprice or nepotism by such authorities. This Court, in taking such a view, is fortified on a reading of the judgment as a whole. After indicating the appropriate schedule, it was held so in paragraph 43: “43. We find that the above Schedule is in conformity with the affiliation / recognition schedule afore-noticed. They both can co-exist. Thus, we approve these admission dates and declare it to be the law which shall be strictly adhered to by all the concerned and none of the authorities shall have the power or jurisdiction to vary these dates of ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -12- admission. Certainty in this field is bound to serve the ends of fair, transparent and judicious method of grant of admission and commencement of the technical courses. Any variation is bound to adversely affect the maintenance of higher standards of education and systemic and proper completion of courses”. 7. It is further pointed out that in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), Apex Court was considering the question of pick and choose by the authorities at their whims and caprice so as to avoid all together approvals and rejections beyond the last date specified in the schedule. 8. On the other hand, learned CGC has invited my attention to the order of the Apex Court produced as Annexure R1(a) in M.A.No.2174/2022 in C.A.No.9048/2022 dated 16.12.2022, and submitted that directions were issued by the Apex Court to consider the case of certain colleges after the cut off date on the peculiar facts and circumstances of those cases; the relevant portion of the said order, reads as follows:- ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -13- “We therefore, permit the petitioners to file an affidavit before this Court stating therein that all facilities including infrastructure, teaching and non-teaching staff etc., which were available at the time of inspection pursuant to the interim orders, are still available. We further clarify that, if on the date of filing of the petitions, the petitioners had a valid No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the concerned State Governments and the requisite affiliation from the Universities/Boards concerned, the same shall be considered as a valid date for the present academic year. We further clarify that the order passed today would also be applicable to all such applicants who are governed by the interim order passed by the Delhi High Court or any other High Court. The PCI shall take decisions on the applications for grant of approval on or prior to 15.11.2022. If any appeals are filed before the Appellate Authority, the same shall be decided prior to 15.12.2022. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -14- last date of admission, insofar as new colleges are concerned, is extended till 30.12.2022. 9. Learned CGC has also invited my attention to the judgment of the Apex Court in _**Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K.Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha 2020 (10) SCC 657**_ , wherein it is held by the Apex Court at paragraph No.21 as follows:- “21. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is held that in the field of Pharmacy Education and more particularly so far as the recognition of degrees and diplomas of Pharmacy Education is concerned, the Pharmacy Act, 1948 shall prevail. The norms and regulations set by the PCI and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act would have to be followed by the concerned institutions imparting education for degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy, including the norms and regulations with respect to increase and /or decrease in intake capacity of the students and the decisions of the PCI shall only be followed by the institutions imparting degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy. The questions are answered accordingly”. W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 10. So also it is submitted that even though M.A.No.1152/2023 was filed in C.A.No.9048/2012 seeking modification of the cut off date as per order dated 10.01.2023, Apex Court passed an order stating as follows: “We are only inclined to consider the issue with regard to considering permission granted by PCI for the next academic session”. Therefore, it is contended that no interference is required to the stand adopted by the PCI in the impugned orders. 11. I have evaluated the rival submissions made across the Bar. Since the issue revolves around the judgment of the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), it is better that the relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted for having a proper and effective appreciation of the contentions advanced by the rival parties. “40. The above schedule though was finalized by the Committee on 29-1-2012 but the same appears to have been notified only on 30-9-2012. The reasons for the same are again unknown. We are unable to appreciate that once the academic session begins on 1[st] August, then as to why should admission be granted up to 30[th] August of the year, particularly when, as per the terms of the schedule, beyond or after 30[th] April, AICTE will not issue any approval for commencement of new course for additional intakes. The schedule, thus, introduces an element of arbitrariness and W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -16- may cause prejudice to the students who might miss their classes for a period of one month without any justification. Thus, it is required that the abovestated schedule be modified to bring it in line with the schedule for approval as well as to prevent inequalities, arbitrariness and prejudice from affecting the students in relation to their academic courses. The order granting or refusing approval, thus, should positively be passed by 10[th] April of the relevant year. The appeal should be filed within one week and the Appellate Committee should hear the appeal and decide the same by 30[th] April of the relevant year. The University should grant/decline approval/affiliation by 15[th] May of the relevant year. Advertisement should be issued and entrance examination conducted positively by the end of the month of May. 41. The appropriate Schedule, thus, would be as follows: |follows:|| |---|---| |Event|Schedule| |Conduct of entrance examination<br>(AIEEE/State<br>CET/Management<br>quota exams, etc.)|In the month of May| |Declaration of result of qualifying<br>examination (12thexam or similar) and<br>entrance examination|On or before 5thJune| |1stround of counseling/admission for<br>allotment of seats|To be completed on or<br>before30thJune| |2ndround of counseling for allotment<br>of seats|To be completed on or<br>before 10thJuly| |Last round of counseling for allotment<br>of seats|To be completed on or<br>before 20thJuly| |Last date for admittingcandidates in|30thJuly| ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -17- |seats other than allotted above|However, any number<br>of<br>rounds<br>for<br>counseling could be<br>conducted depending<br>on local requirements,<br>but all the rounds<br>shall be completed<br>before30thJuly| |---|---| |Commencement of academic session|1stAugust| |Last date up to which students can be<br>admitted against vacancies arising due<br>to any reason (no student should be<br>admitted in any institution after the<br>last date under any quota)|15thAugust| |Last date of granting or refusing<br>approval by AICTE|10thApril| |Last date of granting or refusing<br>approval<br>by<br>University/State<br>Government|15thMay| 42. The admissions to academic courses should start, as proposed, by 1[st] August of the relevant year. The seats remaining vacant should again be duly notified and advertised. All seats should be filled positively by 15[th] August after which there shall be no admission, whatever be the reason or ground. ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -18- 43. We find that the above schedule is in conformity with the affiliation/recognition schedule aforenoticed. They both can co-exist. Thus, we approve these admission dates and declare it to be the law which shall be strictly adhered to by all concerned and none of the authorities shall have the power or jurisdiction to vary these dates of admission. Certainty in this field is bound to serve the ends of fair, transparent and judicious method of grant of admission and commencement of the technical courses. Any variation is bound to adversely affect the maintenance of higher standards of education and systematic and proper completion of courses. 46. For the reasons afore-recorded, we find no merit in both the appeals afore-referred. While dismissing these appeals, we issue the following directions: 46.1 Both grant/refusal of approval and admission schedule, as aforestated, shall be strictly adhered to by all the authorities concerned including AICTE, the University, the State Government and any other authority directly or indirectly connected with the grant of approval and admission. - 46.2 No person or authority shall have the power or jurisdiction to vary the schedule prescribed hereinabove. 46.3 While dealing with the application for grant of approval to new colleges or additional seats, AICTE shall inform the applicant within three weeks from the date of receipt of its W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 application or date of inspection, as the case may be, the shortcomings/defects, who, in turn, shall remove such shortcomings/defects within 15 days from the date of such communication or within such period as AICTE may grant and re-submit its papers without default. The process of grant of approval has to be transparent and fair. AICTE or the University or the State Government concerned shall take disciplinary action against the person who commits default in adherence to the schedule and performance of his duties in accordance therewith. 46.4 The reports submitted by the Expert Committee visiting the College should be unambiguous and clear, and should bear the date and time of inspection and should be sufficiently comprehensive and inspection be conducted in the presence of a representative of the institute. 46.5 The students of the appellant College shall be re-allocated to the recognized and affiliated colleges in terms of the judgment of the High Court; and AICTE and the university concerned shall ensure that the academic courses of these students are completed within the balance period of the academic year in all respects. For this purpose, if extra classes are required to be held, the institute concerned, the University and AICTE are directed to ensure holding of such extra classes. 46.6 If the appellate authority decides the matter prior to 30[th] April of the year concerned and grants approval to a college, ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -20- then alone such institution will be permitted to be included in the list of colleges to which admissions are to be made and not otherwise. In other words, even if the appellate authority grants approval after 30[th] April, it will not be operative for the current academic year. All colleges which have been granted approval/affiliation by 10[th] or 30[th] April, as the case may be, shall alone be included in the brochure/advertisement/website for the purpose of admission and none thereafter.” 12. In my considered opinion, the directions given by the Apex Court would clearly apply to the approval for the D.Pharm courses also, since the adherence to the time limit for all parties including the State Government is clearly spelt out in the judgment. Even though the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the timeline fixed by the Apex Court would apply only to the University / State authority etc., and therefore it would not stand in the way of this Court issuing directions under Article 226 as held by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.13969/2015 dated 11.06.2015; I am of the considered opinion that if such directions are issued taking into account the factual circumstances pointed out in each and every case, then the requirement of fixing a final cut off date would be diluted, which would ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 interfere with the standards of courses conducted by the institutions. Above all, when an order is passed by the apex court directing the authorities to adhere to certain standards for granting approval and admission, it is a law declared under article 141 of the constitution of India, binding on all courts. Therefore if I accept the contention advanced by the learned senior counsel that the direction issued by the apex court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) would only apply to the authorities, I would be in effect diluting the law laid down by the apex court under article 141 of the constitution. 13. In that view of the matter, I am of the definite opinion that the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra) with respect to the cut off date is applicable to all authorities, and even though this Court may not be an authority as specified by the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), the timeline prescribed by the Apex Court would be altered if directions are issued invoking the power conferred under Article 226; since the idea behind fixing the cut off date for the authorities to grant approval is for maintaining standards in institutions. In that view of the matter, I do not think the petitioners have made out ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -22- any case of arbitrariness or illegality or other legal infirmities so as to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the PCI. 14. The next question to be considered is as to whether the approval granted to other institutions discussed above after the cut off date would confer any benefit to the petitioners ; I am of the view that such approvals were granted on the basis of the direction issued by the Apex Court, taking into account the factual circumstances, and the legal requirements that were complied with by the institutions in question. Even though the learned senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that, in the earlier round of litigation filed by the very same petitioners, it is clearly stated that the consent of affiliation is not required so as to lead to the rejection of the applications, I am of the view that since in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra), cut off date is fixed by the Apex Court, that question does not arise in the instant writ petitions. Moreover, in the order passed by the Apex Court in M.A.No.2174/2022 in C.A.No.9048/2012 dated 16.12.2022, directions were issued on realizing that the institutions were having no objection certificates from the concerned State Governments, and the requisite affiliation from the W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -23- Universities or Boards concerned. Therefore, the contention advanced by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners that there is arbitrariness on the part of the PCI in granting admission after the cutoff date fixed has not much force of law. Therefore, the said contention advanced also cannot be sustained under law. Resultantly, writ petitions fail; and accordingly they are dismissed. However, I make it clear that the applications submitted by the petitioners for the academic year 2023-2024 shall be considered by the PCI in accordance with the law and within the timeline fixed for the purpose of granting approval bearing in mind the principles of law stated by the Apex Court in _**Parshvanath**_ (supra). Sd/- SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE uu ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -24- ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5419/2023`** |`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`|| |---|---| |`Exhibit-P1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 38755`| ||`OF 2022 DATED 08.12.2022 PASSED BY THIS`| ||`HON'BLE COURT`| |`Exhibit-P2`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.01.2023 IN`| ||`W.A NO. 1696 OF 2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE`| ||`COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P3`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.01.2023 IN`| ||`IA.NO.1/2023 IN WP(C) NO. 38755 OF 2022 PASSED`| ||`BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P4`|`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTE`| ||`OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE 1ST`| ||`RESPONDENT HELD ON 08.08.2022.`| |`Exhibit-P5`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 03.11.2022`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST`| ||`RESPONDENT IN THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT AS`| ||`AVAILABLE FROM THE PORTAL OF THE PCI ALONG`| ||`WITH AFFIDAVIT.`| |`Exhibit-P6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION REF.NO.14-`| ||`443/2022-PCI (APPEAL PROCESS 2022-2023)/14367`| ||`DATED 22.10.2022 ALONG ANNEXURES.`| |`Exhibit-P7`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.12.2022 IN`| ||`LPA 753/2022 [DBM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY VS.`| ||`PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA] PASSED BY THE`| ||`HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI.`| |`Exhibit-P8`|`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`19.01.2023 IN R.P. NO. 82 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P9`|`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`23.01.2023 IN R.P. NO. 82 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`30.01.2023 IN R.P. NO. 82 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P11`|`TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`08.02.2023 IN R.P. NO. 82 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P12`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE PHARMACY`| ||`COUNCIL OF INDIA THROUGH E-MAIL DATED`| ||`10.02.2023.`| W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -25- ``` Exhibit-P13 ``` ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R1(b) ``` ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P14 ``` ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R1(a) ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER REF.NO.23/PCI-3989/B+D/18000-03 DATED 13.02.2023 OF THE PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA. ``` ``` True copy of the order dated 21 10 2022of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.B9/4557/2022 ISSUED BY LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DATED 14.02.2023. ``` ``` True copy of the order in Misc Application No 2174 of 2022 in CA No 9048 of 2012 dated 16 12 2022 before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India ``` ## W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -26- ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5571/2023`** |`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`|| |---|---| |`Exhibit-P1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED`| ||`08.12.2022 IN W.P.(C) NO. 38755 OF 2022 AND`| ||`CONNECTED CASE PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT .`| |`Exhibit-P2`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.01.2023`| ||`IN W.A NO. 1696 OF 2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE`| ||`COURT`| |`Exhibit-P3`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.01.2023 IN`| ||`IA.NO.1/2023 IN WP(C) NO. 38790 OF 2022 PASSED`| ||`BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.`| |`Exhibit-P4`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE`| ||`MINUTE OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING OF`| ||`THE 1ST RESPONDENT HELD ON 08.08.2022`| |`Exhibit-P5`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 05.11.2022`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST`| ||`RESPONDENT IN THE PRESCRIBED FORMAT AS`| ||`AVAILABLE FROM THE PORTAL OF THE PCI ALONG`| ||`WITH AFFIDAVIT`| |`Exhibit-P6`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION REF.NO.14-`| ||`443/2022-PCI (APPEAL PROCESS 2022-2023)/14367`| ||`DATED 22.10.2022 ALONG ANNEXURES`| |`Exhibit-P7`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.12.2022`| ||`IN LPA 753/2022 [DBM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY VS.`| ||`PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA] PASSED BY THE`| ||`HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI`| |`Exhibit-P8`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`19.01.2023 IN R.P.NO. 81 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT`| |`Exhibit-P9`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`23.01.2023 IN R.P.NO. 81 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT`| |`Exhibit-P10`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`30.01.2023 IN R.P.NO. 81 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT`| |`Exhibit-P11`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED`| ||`08.02.2023 IN R.P.NO. 81 OF 2023 PASSED BY`| ||`THIS HON'BLE COURT`| |`Exhibit-P12`|`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE`| ||`PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA THROUGH E-MAIL DATED`| ||`10.02.2023.`| W.P.(C) Nos.5419 & 5571 of 2023 -27- ``` Exhibit-P13 ``` ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R1(a) ``` ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P14 ``` ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R1(b) ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER REF.NO.23/PCI-3989/B+D/18000-03 DATED 13.02.2023 OF THE PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA ``` ``` True copy of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Misc. application No. 2174/2022 in CA No. 9048 of 2012 dated 16.12.2022 ``` ``` A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.B9/4557/2022 ISSUED BY LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DATED 14.02.2023 ``` ``` True copy of the order dated 21.10.2022 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court ```