Case Background
The petitioner is a Trust registered under the Indian Trust Act, 1882. It has established A & E College of Pharmacy at Baluahi in district Samastipur. The college offers Diploma in Pharmacy and Bachelor in Pharmacy (B.Pharm) courses.
The Pharmacy Council of India granted approval to the college to run the B.Pharm course by letter dated 10 June 2019. In the same letter, approval was also given for Diploma in Pharmacy for the session 2019–20, allowing 60 admissions.
Further approval from the Pharmacy Council of India for the period 2019 to 2023 was granted, allowing an intake of 60 students, later enhanced to 100 students for the session 2020–21. AICTE also granted approval for the sessions 2019–20 and 2020–21 by letter dated 25 June 2021.
The State Government, after inspecting the institute, issued No Objection Certificates on 09 December 1990 and 25 November 2020 for 60 seats, and later for 100 seats vide letter dated 28 June 2021. Lalit Narayan Mithila University (L.N.M.U.) granted affiliation to the college on 13 January 2020 for the session 2019–23. Applications for subsequent approvals were stated to be pending.
Despite these approvals, the University did not conduct examinations for B.Pharm first year students of academic sessions 2019–23 and 2020–24. Nor did it take any decision to promote the students during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Fearing serious harm to the academic future of its students, the college approached the Patna High Court under its civil writ jurisdiction. The writ petition sought directions to the University to either hold examinations for the B.Pharm first year or, in the alternative, to promote the students in view of the pandemic.
What the Court Examined and Decided
The core grievance placed before the Court was that the examining body, L.N.M.U., had failed to conduct B.Pharm examinations or take a promotion decision, even though all statutory approvals and affiliation were in place. This, according to the petitioner, had put students in a state of “frenzy and anxiety” and risked spoiling their careers.
On behalf of the petitioner, it was argued that the college enjoyed recognition and approval from Pharmacy Council of India, AICTE and the State Government, and affiliation from the University. Therefore, the University had no valid reason to withhold examinations or delay a decision on promotion.
Counsel submitted that as the examining body, the University’s inaction directly harmed students’ futures and also affected the reputation of the college. Students had completed their courses but could not appear in examinations or be promoted, unlike their counterparts in other institutions.
The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy & Ors., reported in (2021) 10 SCC 657. It was argued that this decision made it clear that the Pharmacy Council of India is the primary regulatory body for pharmacy education, including recognition of courses and intake capacity, under the Pharmacy Act, 1948. Hence, the University could not ignore or override the Council’s regulations.
In response, counsel for L.N.M.U. contended that the University could hold examinations only on the basis of its own Regulations. It was submitted that the University had already sent draft Ordinance and Regulations for a four-year B.Pharm course to the Chancellor of Universities on 13 May 2020, and again on 06 July 2021.
The University had also written to the Chairman, RUSA, Patna, requesting approval of the draft Ordinance and Regulations so that examinations could be held. During arguments, University’s counsel produced a letter dated 25 June 2021 from the Deputy Secretary, Education Department, stating that the State Government had disallowed the University from conducting the examination.
After hearing both sides, the Court examined the legal framework governing B.Pharm education. It noted that the Pharmacy Council of India, by notification dated 10 December 2014, had framed the Bachelor of Pharmacy (B.Pharm) Course Regulations, 2014.
These Regulations prescribe the syllabus, mode and manner of examinations, and related academic standards. Regulations 10 to 16 deal specifically with the conduct of examinations. They require:
- Theory examinations of three hours’ duration each.
- Practical examinations of four hours’ duration including viva voce.
- Award of sessional marks and maintenance of records.
- Minimum marks for passing each paper.
- Eligibility criteria for promotion to the next year.
The Court reproduced Regulation 15, which provides that examinations mentioned in the Regulations shall be held by an examining authority approved by the Pharmacy Council of India under section 12(2) of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, and that such approval is subject to conditions in Appendix B of the Regulations.
On this basis, the Court held that the University was required to follow the Regulations framed by the Pharmacy Council of India for B.Pharm examinations. Since the Pharmacy Council is a statutory body under a Central Act, its Regulations govern the field of pharmacy education.
The ground taken by the University that it was still in the process of getting its own draft Regulations approved was found to be “wholly frivolous”. The Court observed that it could not permit the University to “play with the lives of the students” admitted in 2019 and 2020.
The Court emphasised that delay in conducting examinations has a direct and cascading effect on the future careers of students. It noted that other universities in India had either conducted examinations or directly promoted students during the Covid-19 pandemic.
By contrast, due to the “laxedicical approach” of L.N.M.U., students of this institute were being deprived of opportunities to apply for future examinations or jobs, as their course schedule had been pushed back. It highlighted that students admitted in 2019–20 and 2020–21 had already completed two years of study, but not even the first-year examinations had been concluded.
Such inaction was declared “illegal and arbitrary”. The Court observed that the University must put its house in order and keep pace with other universities in the country. The Court was informed that Regulations framed by Aryabhatta Knowledge University, another State University in Bihar, had already come into force, and that these Regulations were in consonance with the 2014 B.Pharm Regulations of the Pharmacy Council of India.
Given this, the Court saw no difficulty in directing L.N.M.U. to conduct examinations in accordance with the schedule set by the Pharmacy Council of India. If there was any doubt about how to conduct the examination, the University could adopt the existing Regulations of Aryabhatta Knowledge University and other sister universities of Bihar.
The Court then revisited the Supreme Court judgment in (2021) 10 SCC 657. Quoting paragraph 12.5, it noted that the Pharmacy Act is a complete code on the subject of pharmacy, and that the Pharmacy Council of India regulates education and the profession of pharmacy in India.
The Supreme Court had held that the Pharmacy Act covers all aspects such as course approval, course content, eligibility for students and teachers, examination standards, grant of registration, entry of higher qualification, disciplinary action and even penal provisions. Therefore, in the field of pharmacy, the Pharmacy Act is a special law, and the Pharmacy Council is the autonomous statutory authority.
Relying on this, the Patna High Court held that since the institute had due recognition from all required bodies and NOC from the State Government, there was no scope for further interference by the State. Only the Pharmacy Council of India could recognise or de-recognise the institute.
Finally, the Court issued clear directions. It ordered L.N.M.U. to take a decision within 15 days from the date of judgment on whether:
- to promote the students directly, or
- to conduct examinations.
If the University decided to promote students without examination, it would have to obtain approval from the Pharmacy Council of India. If it chose to conduct examinations, they must be held strictly as per the schedule and pattern prescribed in the B.Pharm Course Regulations, 2014 of the Pharmacy Council of India.
For practical implementation, the Court permitted the University to adopt the examination Regulations of Aryabhatta Knowledge University. It directed that, where examinations were to be held, the complete schedule must be fixed so that they are conducted within two months.
On these directions, the writ petition was allowed.
Why This Judgment Matters
This judgment is important for pharmacy students and colleges across Bihar, especially those affiliated to state universities. It makes clear that once an institute has valid approvals from the Pharmacy Council of India, AICTE, and the State Government, the affiliating university cannot delay examinations on the excuse of incomplete internal regulations.
The Patna High Court stressed that students cannot be made to suffer because of administrative delays between universities and the State Government, even during emergencies like the Covid-19 pandemic. Their academic progress and career timelines must be protected.
The decision also reinforces that, in pharmacy education, the Pharmacy Council of India and its Regulations are central. Universities must align with these standards and, where needed, can adopt existing regulations of other universities rather than putting examinations on hold indefinitely.
For affected students, the immediate impact is that L.N.M.U. must, within a fixed time, either conduct their B.Pharm examinations or secure Council approval for direct promotion. This gives a clear time-bound remedy instead of open-ended uncertainty.
Legal Issues and Answers
-
Issue: Can a university postpone B.Pharm examinations indefinitely on the ground that its own draft regulations are awaiting approval, despite existing Pharmacy Council of India Regulations and valid approvals of the institute?
Answer: No. The Court held that B.Pharm examinations must be conducted in accordance with the Pharmacy Council of India Regulations, 2014, and the University’s plea of pending draft regulations is frivolous and amounts to arbitrary inaction. -
Issue: Who is the primary regulatory authority for pharmacy education, including examinations and recognition of courses and institutes?
Answer: Relying on (2021) 10 SCC 657, the Court held that the Pharmacy Council of India, under the Pharmacy Act, 1948, is the primary statutory authority and the Pharmacy Act is a complete code governing pharmacy education and profession. -
Issue: What directions can the High Court give when students’ careers are affected by the University’s failure to hold examinations during a pandemic?
Answer: The Court directed the University to, within 15 days, decide either to promote students directly with Pharmacy Council approval or to conduct examinations as per Pharmacy Council Regulations, and, if opting for exams, to complete them within two months.
Cases Cited by the Court
- Pharmacy Council of India v. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy & Ors., (2021) 10 SCC 657.
Case Details
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19063 of 2021
Case Title: A and E College of Pharmacy Baluahi, District- Samastipur through its Chairman namely, Ashok Kumar v. Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga through its Registrar & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Citation: 2022(2) PLJR 130
Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. P.K. Shahi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
For the State: Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, GA III with Mr. Shiv Kumar, AC to GA III
For the University: Mr. Md. Nadim Seraj, Advocate
Nature of the Case: Writ petition under civil writ jurisdiction seeking directions regarding conduct of B.Pharm examinations or promotion of students.
Date of Judgment: 31-03-2022
Court: High Court of Judicature at Patna
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about
how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar,
you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
