Gujarat High Court: A.S. Supehia, J. allowed the writ petitions filed by D. Pharm students aggrieved by their non-registration as Pharmacist under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (the Act) irrespective of their training.

The case of the petitioners was that the respondent-the Gujarat State Pharmacy Council was not registering them as Pharmacist under the Act despite having been undertaken the necessary training of 500 hours for three months from the respective medical stores. It is the case of the respondent authorities that the training from the medical stores, from which the petitioners have undertaken, are not approved and hence, the petitioners cannot be registered as Pharmacist.

The Court noted that the entire issue was with regard to their undertaking practical training from the medical stores, which were not approved and hence, they were not registered as Pharmacist.

The Court stated that respondent 2  in its affidavit-in-reply admitted the fact that the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) no medical store under regulation 4.4 of the Pharmacy Practice Regulations, 2015 (the Regulation of 2015) for the purpose of imparting practical training to the students of Diploma in Pharmacy Course like the present petitioners has been approved. Thus, the Court was of the opinion that petitioners cannot be faulted for the action of the respondent authorities in not approving the medical stores under regulation 4.4 of the Regulation of 2015 and hence, the petitioner has no option to take their training from the respective medical stores.

The affidavit-in-reply also mentioned that the Council will be notifying the process of granting approval of Pharmacy/Chemist and Druggist through online mode and necessary technology support for the same is under development and validation.

Finally, in the affdiavit-in-reply, it was stated that in order to avoid hardship to the students, who have already undergone or undergoing the D.Pharm course, the practical training undertaken by a student from a Pharmacy, Chemist and Druggist licenced under the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 and rules made thereunder shall be considered as approved for registration of students by the State Pharmacy Councils as per the precedence, provided the student has undergone the D.Pharm course in an institution approved by the PCI under Section 12 of the Act.

The Court allowed the writ petitions in view of the affidavit filed by the PCI and the impugned order(s) challenging in the respective petitions denying such registration of the petitioners as Pharmacist by the respondent 3 were quashed and set aside. It was directed that the petitioners shall be registered as Pharmacist under the State Pharmacy Council.

[Oza Nikun Dashrathbhai v. State of Gujarat, R/Special Civil Application No. 19626 of 2018, decided on 03-08-2022]

for the Petitioner: Hardik D Muchhala

for respondent 1: Sahil Trivedi

for respondent 2:  Devang Vyas

for respondent 3: Rashesh H Parikh, Hemang H Parikh

for respondent 4: SAN Associates LLP

*Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.