JUDGMENT (B.R. Gavai, J.) The Petitioners have approached this Court for a writ direction or order quashing and setting aside the resolutions dated 19.08.2009, issued by the Respondent no. 4. 2. The Petition has been amended subsequently seeking a declaration that the resolution passed by Respondent no. 2 dated 7th/8th April, 2007 and 20th/21st May, 2009, wherein Respondent no. 2 had resolved not to approve 10+2 course conducted by National Open School, Respondent no. 6, for admission for Pharmacy course for the purpose of registration as a Pharmacist, is arbitrary, illegal and bad in law. 3. Various rival contentions have been advanced at the bar. 4. Shri Shivan Dessai, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, submits that the said resolution is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as the Medical Council of India and the Council for Dental Medicine of India have recognised the said 10+2 course conducted by the Respondent no. 6. It is submitted that for no rhyme or reason, the Respondent no. 2 is not approving the said course. The contention on behalf of the Petitioners is supported by the Respondent no. 6, who is represented by learned Counsel Shri Ryan Menezes. The Respondent no. 4-College submits that the Respondent no. 2 had informed the Petitioners regarding non recognition of 10+2 course conducted by Respondent no. 6, only after the Petitioners were admitted. 5. Shri Ferreira, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the Respondent no. 2, on the contrary, submits that the Respondent no. 2 is a Central Council in the faculty of Pharmacy. Merely because the Medical Council of India or the Council for Dental Medicine of India have recognised the course conducted by Respondent no. 6, it cannot be said that the Respondent no. 2 has also recognized the said course. Learned Counsel further submits that in the matter of Pharmacy education, the Respondent no. 2 will have a primacy and an overriding effect on the decision/resolutions made by any other Authority. 6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find it necessary to go into the merits of the matter. It is pertinent to note that this Court whilst admitting the Petition on 17.03.2010, has granted an interim relief thereby permitting the Petitioners to continue the course for which they have been admitted by the Respondent no. 4, Goa College of Pharmacy. It is pertinent to note that this Court whilst admitting the Petition on 17.03.2010, has granted an interim relief thereby permitting the Petitioners to continue the course for which they have been admitted by the Respondent no. 4, Goa College of Pharmacy. No doubt that this Court has observed that merely passing the course successfully will not entitle the Petitioners to registration with Respondent no.2. 7. It is informed at the bar that it is only Petitioner no. 1, who has successfully completed the diploma and pharmacy course. Shri Dessai, learned Counsel, further submits that the Petitioner no.1 has cleared the examination. In so far as rest of the Petitioners are concerned, it is reported at the bar that they could not complete the course for variety of reasons. In that view of the matter, the only question that arises for consideration is of Petitioner no. 1. 8. We find that after permitting the Petitioner no.1 to complete the course for a period of two years and after permitting him to appear the examination, it would be totally unjust to non-suit him on the grounds of equity and good conscience. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we find that it is just and proper for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction and direct the Respondents to treat the Petitioner no.1's admission as a valid one and declare his results, and if found successful grant him diploma in Pharmacy. Needless to state, that upon granting diploma in Pharmacy, the Respondent no. 2 shall grant him registration under the Rules and Regulations, if the Petitioner No.1 is otherwise entitled. 9. In that view of the matter, the Petition is allowed. (1) The Petitioner no. 1's admission to B Pharma course is directed to be treated as valid admission. (2) If the Petitioner No.1 has cleared the examination, the Respondent nos. 3 and 4 shall grant him a diploma in Pharmacy. If the Petitioner no.1 applies to the competent Authorities for registration, the said Authority shall grant registration to the Petitioner No.1 on production of his diploma and upon his fulfilment of all other requirements. 10. Needless to state that we have passed the aforesaid Order in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and it shall not be treated as a precedent. It is made clear that we have not considered the petition on merits. 10. Needless to state that we have passed the aforesaid Order in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and it shall not be treated as a precedent. It is made clear that we have not considered the petition on merits. All rival contentions raised by the parties are kept open. 11. Rule is made absolute with no orders as to costs.