Chaudhary Shriram Yadav Mahavidhyalaya v. Pharmacy Council Of India
$~65 & 66 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14924/2024 CHAUDHARY SHRIRAM YADAV MAHAVIDHYALAYA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Sanjay Sharawat and Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocates.
versus PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Mr.
Ayushman Singh and Ms. Maulishree Pathak, Advocates.
+ W.P.(C) 14925/2024 SRS EDUCATION INSTITUTE .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Sanjay Sharawat and Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocates.
versus PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Mr.
Ayushman Singh and Ms. Maulishree Pathak, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
O R D E R
% 23.10.2024 1.
The petitioners vide the instant writ petitions have prayed for the following reliefs:- "[a] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct that the approval granted by the Respondent to the Petitioner for D.Pharm course for academic session 2023-24 shall be treated as approval for academic session The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2024 at 12:13:09
2024-25 in view of the timelines fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parshavanath Charitable Trust & Ors vs AICTE [(2013) 3 SCC 385]; and [b] Issue a writ of mandamus and direct the Respondent to issue formal letter of approval to the Petitioner for D.Pharm course for academic session 2024-25 with QR code and to reflect the status of the Petitioner as an approved institution w.e.f. academic session 2024-25 expeditiously and in a time bound manner;" 2.
However, it is seen that the petitioners are situated in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the PCI, submits that vide order dated 14.10.2024 in W.P.(C) 13570/2024, under almost similar circumstances, the Court declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. A perusal of the aforesaid order would indicate that mere situs of any authority, original or appellate, would not be the central determinative factor in conferring jurisdiction upon a High Court. 4.
Moreover, on the ground that a facet of the cause of action has taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, the Court would not be obligated to adjudicate on the same, especially when the essential, material, and integral cause of action had arisen elsewhere. 5.
At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with the liberty to take appropriate recourse, in accordance with law. 6.
Leave and liberty, as prayed, is granted.
7.
The petitions are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. All rights and contentions are left open.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J OCTOBER 23, 2024 Nc/sp The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2024 at 12:13:09