AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mohammad Rafiq
This special appeal seeks to challenge order dated 10.08.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby prayer of the appellant-writ
petitioner for issuing direction to Respondent No. 3, the Convener, Pharmacy Counseling Board to include its name in the counseling for admission of
the students to the course of Diploma in Pharmacy for Academic Session 2018-19, has been declined and S. B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.
13854/2018 filed by the appellant in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17292/2018 has been dismissed.Â
Mr. Vijay Poonia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant, Dhattarwal Education Society moved an
application before respondent-State Government for grant of No Objection Certificate (for short ‘NOC’) for starting new course of Diploma in
Pharmacy. The appellant also moved an application before All India Council for Technical Education (for short ‘AICTE’) seeking approval
to start Diploma Course in Pharmacy from Academic Session 2018-19. The State Government issued Letter of Intent to the appellant-society on
30.01.2018, but Rajasthan University of Health Sciences rejected application of the appellant for grant of affiliation for admission on 20.02.2018 on the
premise that NOC of the State Government has not been submitted along with the application. However, AICTE subsequently issued letter of
approval to the appellant-society on 30.04.2018. Pharmacy Council of India, by virtue of its decision taken in the meeting of its Executive
Committee, also granted approval for Diploma Course in Pharmacy to the institute of the appellant-society on 09.02.2018 with intake of 60 students
for Academic Session 2018-19. However, despite repeated reminders, the State Government did not issue NOC, even though the last date for grant
or refusal of NOC by the State Government/the University has been fixed as 15th May in the calendar, as per judgment rendered by the Supreme
Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Others, (2013) 3 SCC 385. It is therefore argued
that the learned Single Judge erred in law by not directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society for allotment of students by the
Convenor, Pharmacy Council Board.Â
Learned counsel further submitted that even though in the aforesaid calendar, 1st August has been fixed for commencement of session, but in the
same calendar, 15th  August has been fixed as the date up to which students can be admitted against the vacancies arising due to any reason. The
time schedule laid down by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath  Charitable Trust & Others (supra) will be binding upon AICTE, Pharmacy Council
of India or the State Government, but this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not bound by the
aforesaid time schedule. Learned counsel, in support of this argument, relied upon the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Irinjalakuda Diocesan
Educational Trust Kodakara, Thrissur Vs. All India Council for Technical Education & Others, (Writ Petition (c) No. 13969/2015 (U) decided on
11.06.2015), especially the observations made in para no. 15 and 16 of the Report, in which the Kearla High Court held that aforesaid direction does
not take within its ambit the Constitutional Courts namely the High Courts, which exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.Â
Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of Delhi High Court in Jamia Hamdard (Deemed University) Vs. Union of India & Another (Writ Petition
(c) No. 5941/2015 decided on 20.08.2015) and order dated 17.08.2018 passed by the Supreme Court in Yogendra Nath Saxena College of Pharmacy
and Research Centre Vs. Dr. A.P. Abdul Kalam Technical University & Others, (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 938 of 2018) to argue that so far as this
Court is concerned, there is no impediment for passing interim order, directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society in the seat matrix
of the Pharmacy Council of India for allotment of students for Academic Session 2018-19. It is also argued that in view of the law laid down by the
Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Others, (2006) 9 SCC 1 and Jaya Gokul
Educational Trust Vs. Commissioner & Secretary to Government Higher Education Department, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, (2000) 5 SCC 231, the
State Government has no role to play in the matter and it is the AICTE, which is ultimate authority to decided for approval of the intake. Since
AICTE granted approval to the appellantinstitute on 30.04.2018 and Pharmacy Council of India granted approval on 09.02.2018, the State Government
was not justified in withholding NOC, particularly when it had issued Letter of Intent in favor of the appellant on 30.01.2018.Â
Mr. S.K. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents-State and Mr. Dinesh Yadav, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences opposed the special appeal and submitted that the appellant-institute in the present case was
granted approval by AICTE on 30.04.2018 and Pharmacy Council of India on 09.02.2018 and taking note of the delay aforesaid, the State
Government has issued NOC in favour of the appellantinstitute vide order dated 08.08.2018 for Academic Session 201920 and not for Academic
Session 2018-19. Learned Additional Advocate General, in this connection, referred to observations made by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath
Charitable Trust & Others (supra), especially to para 41, according to which first round of counseling/admission for allotment of seats has to be
completed on or before 30th June; second round of counseling/admission has to be completed on or before 10th July and last round of counseling has
to be completed on or before 20th July; last date for admitting candidates in seats other than allotted above shall be 30th July. Academic session has
to commence from 1st August; last date up to which students can be admitted against vacancies arising due to any reason has been indicated to be
15th August with clear stipulation that no student should be admitted in any institution after the last date under any quota. In that very time schedule,
last date for granting or refusing approval by AICTE has been indicated to be 10th April and last date for granting or refusing approval by
University/State Government has been fixed as 15th May. This has been further reiterated by the Supreme Court in Para 42 of the Report by
specifically observing that all the seats should be filled positively by 15th August, after which there shall be no admission, whatever be the reason or
ground. Since both the aforesaid dates had gone by, the State Government was fully justified in granting NOC to the appellant-institute for
Academic Session 2019-20.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find that approval in favour of
the appellant-institute was granted by AICTE on 30.04.2018 and by Pharmacy Council of India on 09.02.2018. It is true that Letter of Intent was
issued by the State Government to the appellant earlier on 30.01.2018, but owing to the delay aforesaid, the State Government has issued NOC on
08.08.2018 for Academic Session 2019-20 only. Learned Single Judge therefore cannot be said to be unjustified in not directing inclusion of name of
the appellant-institute for allotment of the students by passing interim order particularly when it has been noted that writ petition was filed only on
04.08.2018, i.e. after delay of six months, after grant of approval by Pharmacy Council of India on 09.02.2018. We are not inclined to concur with
the view taken by Kerala High Court in Irinjalakuda Diocesan Educational Trust Kodakara, Thrissur (supra), that the time schedule laid down by the
Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Others (supra), would not be binding upon this Court, as by laying down the aforesaid time
schedule, the Supreme Court requires adherence to the academic discipline with specific emphasis that all the seats should be filled positively by 15th
August, after which there shall be no admission, whatever be the reason or ground.
In view of above, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. There is no merit in this special appeal, which
is hereby dismissed.
Stay Application No. 14858/2018 also stands dismissed.