High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/6484/2026

Baba Paras Nath College Of Pharmacy And Paramedical Sciences (Pci-8269) v. Pharmacy Council Of India

2026-05-13Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh21 pages

$~110 & 128 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6484/2026 BABA PARAS NATH COLLEGE OF PHARMACY AND PARAMEDICAL SCIENCES (PCI-8269) .....Petitioner Through:

Mr Brijendra Singh Adv versus PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:

Adv. Chetanya Singh Adv. Chetan Sharma + W.P.(C) 6534/2026 INSTITUTE OF PHARMACY (PCI-3954) .....Petitioner Through:

Mr Brijendra Singh Adv versus PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:

Adv. Chetanya Singh Adv. Chetan Sharma

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 13.05.2026 W.P.(C) 6484/2026 1.

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

"a) writ of certiorari for quashing of decision letter dated 22.01.2026 issued by the Respondent, to the extent of it rejecting the approval to Petitioner Institution for B-Pharm course for the present Academic Session 2026-27, in an Arbitrary, Illegal & Contemptuous Manner; and b) writ of mandamus for direction to Respondent, to process the application of the Petitioner Institution de-hors the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

requirement of Consent of Affiliation / No Objection Certificate from Affiliating University, and consequently process the application and grant approval to Petitioner Institution for the applied B. Pharm Course for the present Academic Session 2026-27; in terms of the circular dated 30.4.2026 issued by the Respondent PCI; . . ." 2.

For the reasons stated in the petition, issue notice. 3.

Mr. Singh, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and states that the government order dated 10.01.2026, has been challenged before the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court by the respondent. 4.

Since there are timelines to be met and there is no stay against the operation of the order dated 10.01.2026, the petition needs to be allowed and are accordingly disposed of, in view of the order dated 13.04.2026 passed in W.P.(C) 4467/2026 and connected matters.

The brief facts in the present case are that the respondent has been established under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 ("the Act") to regulate the field of pharmacy education, institution and courses in the country. The affiliating university in the present case is Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University ("AKTU") established under Uttar Pradesh Technical University Act, 2000. 6.

The petitioner is a pharmacy institution sponsored by Bhal Chandra Institution of Education and Management and is duly approved by the respondent to run D Pharm Course admittedly since 2023-24. 7.

The respondent vide circular dated 03.10.2023 invited applications from institution for extension of approval for existing pharmacy courses and for granting fresh approval for other courses as well as approval of other institutions.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The petitioner institution applied for extension of existing D. Pharm and fresh approval of proposed B. Pharm Course. The same has been rejected by the respondent in the impugned decision letter dated 22.01.2026. The primary reasons for rejection in the impugned order is as under:- a) Non-Submission of the Consent of Affiliation ("COA") of the examining authority for 2026-27 academic session for the said pharmacy courses. b) Non-Submission of the No Objection Certificate ("NOC") of State Government for the said courses. 9.

Hence, the present petition.

10.

Mr. Singh, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent states that in terms of Section 10, 11 and 12 of the Pharmacy Act of 1948, the respondent has framed regulations for granting the approval to the colleges and he more particularly places reliance on Regulation 9 reads as under:- "9. Approval of the authority conducting the course of study1. No person, institution, society, trust or university shall start and conduct B. Pharm programme without the prior approval of the Pharmacy Council of India.

2. Any person or pharmacy college for the purpose of obtaining permission under sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, shall submit a scheme as may be prescribed by the Pharmacy Council of India.

3. The scheme referred to in sub-regulation (2) above, shall be in such form and contain such particulars and be preferred in such manner and be accompanied with such The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

fee as may be prescribed: Provided that the Pharmacy Council of India shall not approve any institution under these regulations unless it provides adequate arrangements for teaching in regard to building, accommodation, labs., equipments, teaching staff, nonteaching staff, etc., as specified in Appendix-A to these regulations."

11.

He further draws my attention to the Scheme framed under regulation 9 for the academic session 2026-27 and more particularly clause No. 4, which reads as under:- 12.

He states that the COA of examining authority is a pre-requisite before the respondent can consider the application for grant of approval for fresh courses. Additionally, as regards the NOC is concerned, it is only in the cases where the State Government has done away with the issuance of NOC on uploading of the said application, the requirement of NOC can be The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

dispensed with for grant of approval for fresh courses/extension of the existing courses.

13.

He further states that it is admitted that the State Government has done away with the NOC and it is only the COA of the examining authority which the petitioners have failed to comply with. 14.

He draws my attention to a response of 10.11.2025 to the letter of the university of examining authority/affiliating university AKTU of 01.11.2025, wherein the response reads as under:- "Speed Post + email Ref. 17-137/2025/Part-1 (Lead File Uttar Pradesh) INSP-12036/8/2025-INSPINSP-12036/8/2025-INSP To The Principal Secretary The Registrar Technical Education Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Section-1 Technical University Govt. of Uttar Pradesh Institute of Engineering and Technology Uttar Pradesh Email:

Campus Sitapur Road psecup.health@gmail.com Lucknow (Uttar Acs.ted@up.gov.in Pradesh) Email:

registrar@aktu.ac.in The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Subject: Inviting kind attention to the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in Pharmacy Council of India vs S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust's Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy & Ors. - reaffirming the supremacy of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the apex regulatory role of PCI in pharmacy education. Ref: 1. Letter No. AKTU/KU S KA /2025/9144 dt.1.11.2025 received from AKTU.

2. Letter No.1/1129089/2025/16-1099/21/2025 dt.31.10.2025 from U.P. Govt.

Sir, This is in reference to above cited letters. It is informed that the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), constituted under the Pharmacy Act, 1948, is the statutory body entrusted with regulating the standards of pharmacy education and profession across the country. Your kind attention is invited to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Pharmacy Council of India vs S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust's Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy & Ors., 2020 wherein the Court has held that the Pharmacy Act, 1948 is a complete and self-contained code in itself and that the Pharmacy Council of India is the sole and apex authority empowered to regulate and prescribe norms for pharmacy education in India.

It is respectfully submitted that the Pharmacy Council of India has The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

statutory authority to require specific documents as part of the approval process for the Bachelor of Pharmacy (B. Pharm) course. This authority emanates from Sections 10 and 18 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, under which the PCI has framed the B. Pharm Regulations, 2014, prescribing the standards and procedures for approval of institutions.

Under Regulation 9(2) of the said Regulations, the PCI has notified a comprehensive Scheme for Approval of B. Pharm Course. As per Scheme 3 of this framework, every applicant institution is required to furnish:

1. No Objection Certificate (NOC) issued by the concerned State Government, and

2. Consent of Affiliation issued by the Examining Authority (i.e., the affiliating University/Board).

The PCI considers and grants approval for the course only upon receipt of these statutory documents, which have been recognized and upheld as mandatory prerequisites by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several judgments, including PCI vs S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trust.

It is, however, brought to the kind notice that, in complete defiance of the statutory provisions enshrined under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the Regulations made thereunder, the Examining Authority in the State has recently declined to issue the Consent of Affiliation to certain institutions on the premise that there is no specific Act or order of the State Government directing them to do so. This position is inconsistent with the established The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

legal framework and contrary to the practice consistently followed over the years, during which Consents of Affiliation were routinely issued to eligible institutions in accordance with the statutory process prescribed by the PCI. Such deviation, without any amendment to the law or policy, is legally untenable and obstructs the implementation of the provisions of a central enactment.

The requirement of Consent of Affiliation is not a matter of administrative discretion but a statutory necessity flowing directly from the B. Pharm Regulations, 2014, framed under Sections 10 and 18 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948. The Examining Authority, being an integral part of the statutory scheme, is duty-bound to issue such consent once the prescribed conditions are satisfied. The refusal to do so on the ground of absence of a separate directive from the State Government effectively negates the operation of the Pharmacy Act, which, being a central legislation, prevails over any contrary administrative instruction or local practice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts & Ors., 2020, has unequivocally affirmed that the Pharmacy Act is a self-contained code and that the authority to regulate pharmacy education lies exclusively with the PCI.

The continued refusal of the Examining Authority to issue the Consent of Affiliation therefore contravenes the provisions of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the Regulations framed thereunder, creating uncertainty and hardship for institutions and students The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

alike. Such obstruction disrupts the statutory approval process, causes confusion among stakeholders, and undermines the uniformity and credibility of pharmacy education as envisaged under the Act.

In view of the above, the Pharmacy Council of India humbly requests to ensure that the statutory scheme under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the B. Pharm Regulations, 2014 is implemented in letter and spirit by all concerned authorities in the State. It is earnestly requested that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the Examining Authority to continue granting Consent of Affiliation to eligible institutions in accordance with law and established precedent, so that the interests of students and institutions are safeguarded and the statutory mandate of the Pharmacy Council of India, as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, is faithfully observed.

The Council reiterates its commitment to maintaining the highest standards of pharmacy education and deeply values the continued support and cooperation of the Government of Uttar Pradesh in furthering this objective.

In this connection, it is intimated that State Government and Examining Authority had been issuing earlier the following letters to Pharmacy courses:

1. Copies of No Objection Certificate (NOC) issued earlier by the State Government to Pharmacy institution (Appendix-1).

2. Copies of Consent of Affiliation issued earlier by the Examining Authority to Pharmacy (i.e., the affiliating University/Board). The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

(Appendix-2) In view of above, you are requested to issue NOC of State Govt. / consent of affiliation of Examining Authority to Pharmacy courses so that PCI can process the application of institutions. Yours faithfully (Anil Mittal) Registrar-cum-Secretary Cc toDr. Montukumar M. Patel Hon'ble President, Pharmacy Council of India, New Delhi E-Mail - presidentpci2718@gmail.com"

15.

He states that the COA is a requirement under the Pharmacy Council Act and in the absence of the same, the respondent is correct in rejecting the request of the petitioner. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment of The Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy and Ors. etc. (2021) 10 SCC 657. 16.

I have heard learned counsels for the parties. 17.

In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the powers of respondent and its rule making authority. The respondent is a statutory authority for regulation and grant of all pharmacy courses in the country. Additionally, the Pharmacy Council of India has the statutory authority to mandate requirement of specific documents for granting approval in terms of Section 10 and 18 of the Act. The above said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Institute of Pharmacy (supra) further clarifies the same position. 18.

In this view of the matter, there is no dispute with the requirement laid down in the scheme under clause 4 framed by the respondent. However, the issue at present is of its implementation.

19.

In the present case, the petitioner's institutions have repeatedly been writing to the affiliating university regarding COA. The response of the AKTU, the affiliating university, has been consistent and same and have been reproduced from the letter of 01.11.2025. The operative portion reads as under:- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

20.

The same has also been reiterated in the letter dated 04.02.2025 (which is in my opinion wrongly dated and should be 04.02.2026). The paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 read as under:- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

21.

The letter of the Government of Uttar Pradesh dated 10.01.2026 is also important in this regard and the relevant portion reads as under:- "3. It is informed that in compliance with the provisions of the aforesaid policy and Act, the process of No Objection Certificate (NOC) of the State Government and Consent of Affiliation given by the Examining Authority for granting affiliation to new degree level engineering institutions in the State, has been simplified, rationalized and abolished by the State Government vide Government Order No. 1023323 dated 12 July 2025, to which AICTE has no objection. The engineering institutions of the State and 281 the students studying in them are benefiting from this decision of the Uttar Pradesh Government.

4. Therefore, under the new system implemented by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, now as per the provisions of Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University Act, 2000, prior approval of the State Government is required to be obtained before issuing affiliation letter by the University for "starting new institutes and new courses", so that the Pharmacy Council of India can consider the applications at its own level without waiting for the approval of the State Government.

5. Apart from this, it is also to note that at point 4 (1) of the Notification No.14-56/2024-PCI (Approval Process for 2025-26 as)/5080 dated 17.12.2024 issued by Pharmacy Council of India, New Delhi, it has been provided with The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

regard to applications for B. Pharma course that if the system of issuing NOC by the State Government for starting Pharmacy course is abolished, then in that case the institute will upload the order of the State Government on the portal as documentary evidence. 282 Therefore, you are requested to take note of the afore mentioned Government Order and new procedure of the State of U.P. and please take the further action, accordingly."

22.

A perusal of the aforesaid paragraphs shows that the State of Uttar Pradesh as well as the affiliating university have categorically stated that there is no requirement of a COA of the examining authority as well as an NOC of the State Government for grant/ extension of any course. That being position of the State of Uttar Pradesh as well as the affiliating university, the respondent insistence on providing the said documents by the petitioner institution is meaningless. The petitioner institution is incapable and is not in a position to provide these documents in view of a clear stand of the university as well as the State that the documents are not required as a precondition for grant of approval. 23.

In this view of the matter and in view of the aforesaid factual position, the petition is allowed and the impugned decision dated 22.01.2026 is quashed. Thus, respondent is directed to process application of the petitioner institution without insisting on the requirement of the aforesaid two documents and in accordance with the timeline fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

24.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

W.P.(C) 6534/2026 25.

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking reliefs similar to the aforesaid petition. 26.

Since this writ petition is also seeking similar reliefs in terms of the Order dated 13.04.2026 passed in W.P. (C) 2621/2026, it is agreed between the parties that the position of law stated in that Order as well as the above Order, shall apply to all other cases connected along with said writ petition. 27.

Accordingly, the impugned decision letter rejecting the grant of approval of pharmacy courses to the petitioner institution is quashed and the respondent is directed to process application of the petitioner institutions without insisting on the requirement of the aforesaid two documents and in accordance with the timeline fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 28.

The petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J MAY 13, 2026/ (MS) The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.