Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1261 (PAT)

Bihar State Pharmacy Council v. Rajiv Kumar Sinha

2008-08-28

CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD, R.M.LODHA

body2008
Judgment 1. At the outset, Mr. P.K. Shahi, Advocate General, raises the preliminary objection about the maintainability of this review [application at the instance of the Bihar State Pharmacy Council through its Registrar Nabin Kumar. He submits that Nabin Kumar, who has filed the review application, is not the Registrar of the Bihar State Pharmacy Council. 2. We are afraid, the contention of the Advocate General does not deserve to be accepted. Firstly, in the affidavit, in support of the review application, Nabin Kumar is stated to be the Registrar of the Bihar State Pharmacy Council. Secondly, in the order dated 4lh July, 2007 ( Letter No.1/Vividh 1-59/2007), the following direction is given: "Hence, Shri Navin Kumar, Registrar Bihar State Pharmacy Council, (as per stay granted by Hon ble Patna High Court) is hereby directed not to proceed with the process of Election of President/Vice-President scheduled to be held on 06.07.07, till further orders." 3. Thus, it is seen from the order dated 4th July, 2007 that Navin Kumar is the Registrar of the Bihar State Pharmacy Council. 4. As to whether the person who has filed the review application is not the person who is cited as Registrar of the Bihar State Pharmacy Council in the order dated 4th July, 2007, in our view, does not deserve to be gone into in this review application. 5. Now with regard to our order dated 20th May, 2008, we are of the considered view that at the time we passed the order, the correct position was not made clear to us. We proceeded on assumption that no election at all has been held to constitute the Bihar State Pharmacy Council. 6. What now transpires is that election was held for the President and Vice - President on 6th July, 2007, as is apparent from para-8 of the writ petition itself. But, according to the petitioner as well as the State government, the said election was illegal as it was held without complying with the mandatory provisions of the relevant rules. 7. We never adverted to the legality or correctness of the election that was held on 6th July, 2007 while passing the order dated 20th May, 2008. But, according to the petitioner as well as the State government, the said election was illegal as it was held without complying with the mandatory provisions of the relevant rules. 7. We never adverted to the legality or correctness of the election that was held on 6th July, 2007 while passing the order dated 20th May, 2008. We passed the order in the backdrop of the statement of the Advocate General that the State government shall be able to constitute the Bihar State Pharmacy Council and complete all necessary formalities for holding of election of President and Vice -President of the Council within three months from that date. 8. In our considered view, the order dated 20th May, 2008 deserves to be recalled and we recall accordingly. The writ petition shall now come up for admission afresh. All contentions on the merit of the writ petition or otherwise, shall be considered at the time of admission of the writ petition. 9. Review application stands disposed of.