Gramin Vikas Multipurpose Education Society, Nagpur Thr. Secretary And Another v. The Pharmacy Council Of India, Thr. Registrar Cum Secretary, New Delhi And ORS

1 908-WP-5816-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.5816 of 2025 [Gramin Vikas Multipurpose Education Society, Nagpur, through its Secretary, Nagpur and another Vs. The Pharmacy Council of India, New Delhi and others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders Shri Firdos Mirza, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri A.I. Sheikh, Counsel for Petitioners. Ms Neerja Choubey, Counsel for Respondent No.1. Ms T.H. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. Shri N.A. Gaikwad, Counsel for Respondent No.6. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJNISH R. VYAS , JJ.

D ATE : 30 th SEPTEMBER, 2025 .

1.

Shri Firdos Mirza, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri A.I. Sheikh, Counsel, appearing for the petitioners argued that as per the norms of the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), it is not the requirement of ten laboratories, but it is of eight laboratories. Despite this, the permission to admit the students was withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner-College is having eight laboratories and not ten laboratories. He further argued that the respondent No.4-Joint Director, Technical Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpur has no authority to inspect the petitioner-College, as he is not authorized by the PCI to do so. He further argued that it is mandatory to supply the copy of the report of the inspection to the petitioner-College, however the same was not supplied to it.

2.

Having gone through the requirement of the PCI, we are prima facie satisfied that the requirement is of eight laboratories and not ten laboratories. We are further prima facie satisfied that the respondent No.4Joint Director is not the authority to carry out the inspection and the copy of the inspection report was not supplied to the petitioner-College, as can be seen from the statement made by the petitioners in this petition. Thus, we find that this is a fit case for grant of interim relief.

2 908-WP-5816-2025.odt 3.

However, before granting such interim relief, we grant an opportunity to the respondents to show contrary to the arguments made on behalf of the petitioners.

4.

Accordingly, at the request of Ms Neerja Choubey, learned counsel for the respondent No.1, Ms. T.H. Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4, and Shri N.A. Gaikwad, learned counsel for the respondent No.6, place this matter tomorrow, i.e. on 1st October, 2025, at 10.30 a.m.

(RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) LANJEWAR