MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. - (1.) This special appeal seeks to challenge order dated 10.08.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby prayer of the appellant-writ petitioner for issuing direction to Respondent No. 3, the Convener, Pharmacy Counseling Board to include its name in the counseling for admission of the students to the course of Diploma in Pharmacy for Academic Session 2018-19, has been declined and S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 13854/2018 filed by the appellant in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17292/2018 has been dismissed.
(2.) Mr. Vijay Poonia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant, Dhattarwal Education Society moved an application before respondent-State Government for grant of No Objection Certificate (for short 'NOC') for starting new course of Diploma in Pharmacy. The appellant also moved an application before All India Council for Technical Education (for short 'AICTE') seeking approval to start Diploma Course in Pharmacy from Academic Session 2018-19. The State Government issued Letter of Intent to the appellant-society on 30.01.2018, but Rajasthan University of Health Sciences rejected application of the appellant for grant of affiliation for admission on 20.02.2018 on the premise that NOC of the State Government has not been submitted along with the application. However, AICTE subsequently issued letter of approval to the appellant-society on 30.04.2018. Pharmacy Council of India, by virtue of its decision taken in the meeting of its Executive Committee, also granted approval for Diploma Course in Pharmacy to the institute of the appellant-society on 09.02.2018 with intake of 60 students for Academic Session 2018-19. However, despite repeated reminders, the State Government did not issue NOC, even though the last date for grant or refusal of NOC by the State Government/the University has been fixed as 15th May in the calendar, as per judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust and Others v. All India Council for Technical Education and Others, (2013) 3 SCC 385. It is therefore argued that the learned Single Judge erred in law by not directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society for allotment of students by the Convenor, Pharmacy Council Board.
(3.) Learned counsel further submitted that even though in the aforesaid calendar, 1st August has been fixed for commencement of session, but in the same calendar, 15th August has been fixed as the date up to which students can be admitted against the vacancies arising due to any reason. The time schedule laid down by the Supreme Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust and Others (supra) will be binding upon AICTE, Pharmacy Council of India or the State Government, but this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not bound by the aforesaid time schedule. Learned counsel, in support of this argument, relied upon the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Irinjalakuda Diocesan Educational Trust Kodakara, Thrissur v. All India Council for Technical Education and Others, (Writ Petition (c) No. 13969/2015 (U) decided on 11.06.2015) , especially the observations made in para no. 15 and 16 of the Report, in which the Kearla High Court held that aforesaid direction does not take within its ambit the Constitutional Courts namely the High Courts, which exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of Delhi High Court in Jamia Hamdard (Deemed University) v. Union of India and Another (Writ Petition (c) No. 5941/2015 decided on 20.08.2015) and order dated 17.08.2018 passed by the Supreme Court in Yogendra Nath Saxena College of Pharmacy and Research Centre v. Dr. A.P. Abdul Kalam Technical University and Others, (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 938 of 2018) to argue that so far as this Court is concerned, there is no impediment for passing interim order, directing inclusion of name of institute of the appellant-society in the seat matrix of the Pharmacy Council of India for allotment of students for Academic Session 2018-19. It is also argued that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and Others, (2006) 9 SCC 1 and Jaya Gokul Educational Trust v. Commissioner and Secretary to Government Higher Education Department, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, (2000) 5 SCC 231 , the State Government has no role to play in the matter and it is the AICTE, which is ultimate authority to decided for approval of the intake. Since AICTE granted approval to the appellant-institute on 30.04.2018 and Pharmacy Council of India granted approval on 09.02.2018, the State Government was not justified in withholding NOC, particularly when it had issued Letter of Intent in favor of the appellant on 30.01.2018.;