JUDGMENT : Petitioner is the Principal of a Self Financing Pharmacy College. The petitioner’s College was established in the year 2016. The College started with B.Pharm with an intake capacity of 100. It is stated that the Educational Agency of the College is running a Medical College. This is situated in Wayanad District. Since this is a composite program and the institution had all the infrastructural and instructional facilities to provide more courses in the field of Pharmacy, the Educational Agency wanted to add on courses in Pharmacy, in the College. Therefore, the petitioner applied to the Pharmacy Council of India for approval to start Pharm.D, M.Pharm and D.Pharm courses. 2. Pharm.D is an integrated course of six years leading to doctoral degree. All these applications were given in 2020. The petitioner was on a bonafide belief that for grant of approval for the above courses, the NOC or the consent of affiliation of the examining body was required. Therefore the petitioner had applied to the State Government, the Director of Medical Education (DME) and the University for the consent of affiliation. Ext.P1 is the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Government for NOC to Pharm.D and M.Pharm. The University had issued their consent of affiliation for both the courses. Ext.P2 is the consent of affiliation by the University to Pharm.D course and Ext.P3 is the similar consent of affiliation issued to M.Pharm. Since the matter was getting delayed as far as D.Pharm is concerned, the petitioner again gave a representation to the DME on 20.04.2021. This was so given because the DME is the examining authority for D.Pharm. Ext.P4 is the representation. The DME rejected the application as per Ext.P5. In Ext.P5, the only reason said for rejection of NOC by DME is that NOC from the Government is essential to start D.Pharm. Subsequently the matter was considered by the 1st respondent in their meeting dated 10.06.2021. Ext.P6 is the Minutes of the meeting dated 10.06.2021. As per Ext.P6, the 1st respondent rejected the request for D.Pharm course because the institution has failed to submit consent of affiliation of Examining Authority. As far as M.Pharm and Pharm.D courses are concerned, the same was approved and D.Pharm course alone is rejected. The petitioner filed an appeal to the Executive Committee. As per Ext.P6, the 1st respondent rejected the request for D.Pharm course because the institution has failed to submit consent of affiliation of Examining Authority. As far as M.Pharm and Pharm.D courses are concerned, the same was approved and D.Pharm course alone is rejected. The petitioner filed an appeal to the Executive Committee. But, as per Ext.P7, the appeal was also dismissed because of the reason that the institution has failed to submit consent of affiliation of Examining Authority for D.Pharm course. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed, mainly challenging Exts.P6 and P7. 3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and ASGI who appeared for the 1st respondent. I also heard the Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 3. 4. The Senior Counsel who appeared for the petitioner submitted that the point to be decided is whether NOC is required for grant of approval for D.Pharm by the 1st respondent and if the same is necessary, whether the reasoning of DME to reject the same is in accordance to law. The Senior Counsel takes me through Sections 10 and 12 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948. The Senior Counsel also takes me through Ext.P9, which is the Education Regulation, 2020 for Diploma course in Pharmacy. The Senior Counsel submitted that as per Clause 8 of Ext.P9, there is no stipulation that a consent of affiliation of the Examining Authority is necessary. The Senior Counsel submitted that Ext.P10 is the Scheme for approval of D.Pharm course under Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act. The Senior Counsel submitted that the Scheme itself is framed without any source of power. The Senior Counsel takes me through the Bachelor of Pharmacy (B.Pharm) Course Regulation, 2014, (hereinafter referred to as 'Regulation 2014') in which there is a corresponding provision like Clause 8 in Ext.P9. The Senior Counsel submitted that in that Regulation, there is a specific provision enabling to frame a Scheme. But the said provision is not there in Ext.P9 Regulation which relates to the Diploma course in Pharmacy. The Senior Counsel also takes me through Clause 7 in Appendix-C of Ext.P9 Regulation in which it is stated that the 1st respondent shall grant recognition if the institution satisfies the conditions laid down in the Rules. It is the definite case of the Senior Counsel that the petitioner complied all the conditions in Ext.P9. The Senior Counsel also takes me through Clause 7 in Appendix-C of Ext.P9 Regulation in which it is stated that the 1st respondent shall grant recognition if the institution satisfies the conditions laid down in the Rules. It is the definite case of the Senior Counsel that the petitioner complied all the conditions in Ext.P9. Therefore, simply because there is a stipulation in Clause 3 of Ext.P10 Scheme that consent of affiliation of Examining Authority is necessary, the same is not applicable in this case. The Senior Counsel also relied on Ext.P8 judgment of this Court especially paragraph 20 of the judgment. 5. The ASGI submitted that a reading of Sections 10 and 12 of the Pharmacy Act will clearly shows that a consent of affiliation of the examining authority is necessary. The ASGI also relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court. That was a judgment dated 26.03.2007 in W.P. (C).Nos.23665-68/2005. The Government Pleader also supported the contentions of the ASGI and submitted that in the light of the specific provisions in the Pharmacy Act, affiliation from the Examining Authority is necessary. The Government Pleader submitted that the DME has to find out infrastructure of the institution and he is the Examining Authority as far as D.Pharm is concerned and therefore, the affiliation of DME is necessary. 6. The short point to be decided in this case is whether the consent of affiliation of Examining Authority is necessary in the light of Clause 3 of Ext.P10 scheme. For deciding the same, some provisions of the Pharmacy Act is to be considered. Firstly I will consider Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, which is extracted hereunder : “12. Approved courses of study and examinations.- (1) Any authority in a State which conducts a course of study for pharmacists may apply to the Central Council for approval of the course, and the Central Council, if satisfied, after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said course of study is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said course of study to be an approved course of study for the purpose of admission to an approved examination for pharmacists. (2) Any authority in a State which holds an examination in pharmacy may apply to the Central Council for approval of the examination, and the Central Council, if satisfied, after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, that the said examination is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said examination to be an approved examination for the purpose of qualifying for registration as a pharmacist under this Act. (3) Every authority in the States which conducts an approved course of study or holds an approved examination shall furnish such information as the Central Council may, from time to time, require as to the courses of study and training and examination to be undergone, as to the ages at which such courses of study and examination are required to be undergone and generally as to the requisites for such courses of study and examination.” 7. From Section 12(1), it is clear that any authority in a State which conducts a course of study for Pharmacists may have to apply to the Central Council for approval of the course. The Central Council, if satisfied after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make that the said course of study is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said course of study to be an approved course of study for the purpose of admission to an approved examination for Pharmacists. Therefore, the duty of the Central Council is to find out after such enquiry as it thinks fit that the said course of study is in conformity with the Education Regulations. As far as Section 12(2) is concerned, it is stated that any authority in a State which holds an examination in Pharmacy may apply to the Central Council for approval of the examination, and if the Central Council is satisfied after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make that the said examination is in conformity with the Education Regulations, shall declare the said examination to be an approved examination for the purpose of qualifying for registration as a pharmacist under this Act. Section 12(2) says that an authority in a State which holds an examination in pharmacy has to approach Central Council to get the approval and Section 12 (1) says any authority in a State which conducts a course of study for pharmacists has to approach the Central Council for approval of course. Section 12(2) says that an authority in a State which holds an examination in pharmacy has to approach Central Council to get the approval and Section 12 (1) says any authority in a State which conducts a course of study for pharmacists has to approach the Central Council for approval of course. Section 12(3) says that every authority in the States which conducts an approved course of study or holds an approved examination shall furnish such information as the Central Council may, from time to time, require as to the courses of study and training and examination to be undergone, as to the ages at which such courses of study and examination are required to be undergone and generally as to the requisites for such courses of study and examination. As I stated earlier, Section 12(1) deals with the approval of a course by the Central Council based on the application of any authority in a State which conducts a course of study and Section 12(2) says about the approval of examination by any authority in a State which holds an examination in Pharmacy. In Sections 12(1) and 12(2), the Pharmacy Council has to follow that the course of study and the examination are in conformity with the Education Regulations. 8. Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act deals about the Education Regulations. It will be better to extract Section 10 : “10. Education Regulations.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Section, the Central Council may, subject to the approval of the Central Government, make regulations, to be called the Education Regulations, prescribing the minimum standard of education required for qualification as a pharmacist. (2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, the Education Regulations may prescribed- (a) the nature and period of study and of practical training to be undertaken before admission to an examination; (b) the equipment and facilities to be provided for students undergoing approved courses of study; (c) the subjects of examination and the standards therein to be attained; (d) any other conditions of admission to examinations. (3) Copies of the draft of the Education Regulations and of all subsequent amendments thereof shall be furnished by the Central Council to all State Governments, and the Central Council shall before submitting the Education Regulations or any amendment thereof, as the case may be, to the Central Government for approval under sub-section (1) take into consideration the comments of any State Government received within three months from the furnishing of the copies as aforesaid. (4) The Education Regulations shall be published in the Official Gazette and in such other manner as the Central Council may direct. (5) The Executive Committee shall from time to time report to the Central Council on the efficacy of the Education Regulations and may recommend to the Central Council such amendments thereof as it may think fit.” 9. Section 10(1) says that subject to the provisions of this Section, the Central Council may, subject to the approval of the Central Government, make regulations, to be called the Education Regulations, prescribing the minimum standard of education required for qualification as a Pharmacist. Therefore, the Education Regulations is to be framed prescribing the minimum standard of education required for qualification as a Pharmacist. Section 10(2) (a) to (d) also deals with the other matters which can be prescribed in the Education Regulations. Based on Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act, Ext.P9 Regulation is framed. Ext.P9 is the Education Regulations, 2020 for Diploma course in Pharmacy. The Regulation which is applicable in this case is Regulation 8. The same is extracted hereunder : “8. Approval of the authority conducting the course of study- (1) No authority in a State shall start or conduct Diploma in Pharmacy course of study without the prior approval of the Pharmacy Council of India. (2) The course of regular academic study prescribed under regulation 6 shall be conducted in an institution, approved by the Pharmacy Council of India under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948. Provided that the Pharmacy Council of India shall not approve any institution under this regulation unless it provides adequate arrangements for teaching in regard to building, accommodation, equipments and teaching staff etc. as specified in Appendix-A to these regulations which may be amended by the Pharmacy Council of India from time to time.” 10. Provided that the Pharmacy Council of India shall not approve any institution under this regulation unless it provides adequate arrangements for teaching in regard to building, accommodation, equipments and teaching staff etc. as specified in Appendix-A to these regulations which may be amended by the Pharmacy Council of India from time to time.” 10. Regulation 8 only says that no authority in a State shall start or conduct Diploma in Pharmacy course of study without the prior approval of the Pharmacy Council of India. Regulation 8(2) says that the course of regular academic study prescribed under Regulation 6 shall be conducted in an institution, approved by the Pharmacy Council of India under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Pharmacy Act. 11. In the proviso to Regulation 8 it is stated that the Pharmacy Council of India shall not approve any institution under this regulation unless it provides adequate arrangements for teaching in regard to building, accommodation, equipments and teaching staff etc. as specified in Appendix-A to the regulations which may be amended by the Pharmacy Council of India from time to time. It will also be beneficial to see conditions to be fulfilled by the institution to be recognised for giving practical training as per Appendix-C of Clause 7 in Ext.P9 Regulation. Clause 7 of Appendix-C in Ext.P9 Regulation is extracted hereunder : “Having satisfied that the institution shall follow the conditions laid down in these rules, the Pharmacy Council of India shall grant such recognition.” 12. A reading of clause 7 of Appendix C of Ext.P9 will show that if an institution satisfy that they are following the conditions laid down in Ext.P9 Rules, the Pharmacy Council of India shall grant recognition. There is no clause in Ext.P9 to give a source of power to frame any scheme. As I observed earlier, Ext.P9 is the Education Regulations, 2020 for Diploma course in Pharmacy. I perused the Bachelor of Pharmacy (B.Pharm) Course Regulations, 2014. In clause 9.2 of the above Regulation clearly says about a scheme prescribed by the Pharmacy Council. It will be better to extract clause 9 of the Regulations, 2014. “9. Approval of the authority conducting the course of study.- 1. xxx xxx 2. I perused the Bachelor of Pharmacy (B.Pharm) Course Regulations, 2014. In clause 9.2 of the above Regulation clearly says about a scheme prescribed by the Pharmacy Council. It will be better to extract clause 9 of the Regulations, 2014. “9. Approval of the authority conducting the course of study.- 1. xxx xxx 2. Any person or pharmacy college for the purpose of obtaining permission under sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Pharmacy Act, shall submit a scheme as may be prescribed by the Pharmacy Council of India.” 13. The corresponding provision to the above clause in Ext.P9 is clause 8, which I already extracted earlier. In Ext.P9, there is no regulation empowering the Pharmacy Council to frame a scheme as far as D.Pharm course is concerned. But, in Regulations, 2014, there is power to the Pharmacy Council to frame a scheme. Therefore, the source of power to the Pharmacy Council to frame Ext.P10 scheme is not available in Ext.P9 Regulations. The consent of affiliation of Examining Authority is prescribed in clause 3 of Ext.P10 scheme. First of all, there is no source of power to the 1st respondent to frame a scheme as evident by Ext.P10, based on Ext.P9 Regulations. I make such an observation because in Regulations, 2014, clause 9 clearly says about a scheme that may be prescribed by the Pharmacy Council of India. 14. Assume for argument sake, the 1st respondent has got inherent power to frame Ext.P10 scheme, the question is whether there can be a condition for consent of affiliation of Examining Authority for considering approval of D.Pharm course under Sec.12 of the Pharmacy Act. There is no such a ladder in Sec.12 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 or in Ext.P9 Regulations, which stipulate that consent of affiliation of Examining Authority is necessary for considering an application for approval of D.Pharm course under Sec.12 of the Pharmacy Act. Therefore, according to me, the consent of affiliation of Examining Authority is not necessary for considering an application under Sec.12 of the Pharmacy Act. Moreover, Ext.P8 is a judgment delivered by this Court on 8.2.2019 in W.P.(C.) No. 26571/2018 and connected cases. Admittedly, the above judgment became final. Ext.P8 is a judgment, which considered clause 9.2 of Regulations, 2014. This Court considered the similar question in detail in paragraph Nos.19 and 20. Paragraph Nos.19 and 20 of Ext.P8 judgment is extracted hereunder: “19. Moreover, Ext.P8 is a judgment delivered by this Court on 8.2.2019 in W.P.(C.) No. 26571/2018 and connected cases. Admittedly, the above judgment became final. Ext.P8 is a judgment, which considered clause 9.2 of Regulations, 2014. This Court considered the similar question in detail in paragraph Nos.19 and 20. Paragraph Nos.19 and 20 of Ext.P8 judgment is extracted hereunder: “19. The next point to be considered is the validity of stipulation of No Objection Certificate from the State Government in the scheme framed under regulation 9.2 of B.Pharm Course Regulations, 2014. In the scheme, it is stipulated as follows : 3. “NOC/approval of the State Govt. for starting B.Pharm course for the session applied for by the institution. (a) This document shall be submitted by the institution as soon as possible but without fail before making admissions. (b) In case institution is not able to submit NOC/approval of the State Govt. at the time for applying to the Council with SIF, the institution shall submit duly notarized affidavit on court paper to the effect that- - institution will without fail obtain and submit NOC/approval of the State Govt. to the PCI before making admissions. - in case the institution fails to submit the NOC/approval of the State Govt. before making admissions and comply with the prescribed norms, the approval of the PCI if granted shall be deemed to be withdrawn”. 20. The power given to the Pharmacy Council under Section 10 is only in regard to the standard of education. That means, to approve the course of study and also to approve the examination for qualification for registration as a pharmacist. Therefore, it cannot make any scheme not relatable to the power given under Section 10. When a condition is stipulated and it has no nexus with the object for which the power is given, that condition becomes arbitrary. The State has no role as far as for prescribing standards for education for Pharmacy Council of India. Absolutely, no reasons have been stated in the counter affidavit justifying the stipulation of No Objection Certificate.” 15. This Court clearly stated that the power given to the Pharmacy Council under Sec.10 of the Pharmacy Act is only to prescribe minimum standard of education required for qualification as a Pharmacist. Similarly, Sec.10(2) (a) to (d) of the Pharmacy Act are the provisions which deals about the other matters that can be prescribed. This Court clearly stated that the power given to the Pharmacy Council under Sec.10 of the Pharmacy Act is only to prescribe minimum standard of education required for qualification as a Pharmacist. Similarly, Sec.10(2) (a) to (d) of the Pharmacy Act are the provisions which deals about the other matters that can be prescribed. This Court clearly says that to approve the course of study and also to approve the examination for qualification for registration as a Pharmacist, there cannot be any scheme not relatable to the power given under Sec. 10 of the Pharmacy Act. This Court observed that when a condition is stipulated and it has no nexus with the object for which the power is given, that condition becomes arbitrary. This Court also observed that the State has no role for prescribing standards for education of Pharmacy Council of India. The same principle is applicable here also. Clause 3 of Ext.P10 scheme not relatable to the power given under Sec.10 of the Pharmacy Act. It has no nexus with the object for which the power is given. In such circumstances, according to me, the consent of affiliation of Examining Authority prescribed as a prerequisite mandatory document to be submitted by the applicant for approval under Sec. 12 of the Pharmacy Act is arbitrary and unsustainable. 16. Coming to the facts of this case, admittedly DME is the Examining Authority of D.Pharm course. But as per Ext.P5, DME says that, NOC from the Government is essential to start D.Pharm course. First of all, even as per Clause 3 of Ext.P10, consent of affiliation of Examining Authority alone is necessary and admittedly DME is the Examining Authority of D.Pharm. Moreover, in the light of the findings in this judgment, Ext.P5 will not stand. That can be set aside. Exts.P6 and P7 are the decisions by which the 1st respondent and the appellate authority dismissed the application of the petitioner solely on the reason that, the petitioner has failed to submit consent of the affiliation of Examining Authority for introduction of new D.Pharm course. This will not stand in the light of the findings in this judgment. The first respondent has to reconsider the matter to find out whether the petitioner satisfies the other conditions prescribed in the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the Regulations framed. There can be a time frame to take such a decision. This will not stand in the light of the findings in this judgment. The first respondent has to reconsider the matter to find out whether the petitioner satisfies the other conditions prescribed in the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and the Regulations framed. There can be a time frame to take such a decision. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner : (1) Clause 3 of Ext.P10, in so far as it insists on the production of consent of affiliation of Examining Authority for approval of D.Pharm course is set aside. (2) It is declared that the 1st respondent is not competent to insist on the production of consent of affiliation of the Examining Authority for the grant of approval of D.Pharm course in the petitioner's College. (3) Exts.P5, P6 and P7 in so far as the same reject the approval of D.Pharm course in the petitioner's College, is set aside. (4) The first respondent is directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner for approval of D.Pharm course in accordance to law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.