The Supreme Court has recently expressed serious concern over the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) for acting irresponsibly in rejecting approvals for pharma colleges. The court highlighted that PCI, an expert body in pharmacy education, should be more diligent and avoid arbitrary actions that affect students' futures.
“Looking at the facts in all these matters...we are of the considered opinion that it is high time that such bodies like Pharmacy Council of India, which is supposed to be expert in the field of specialized education, acts with due diligence. It is only on account of total lack of application of mind and exercise of powers in an arbitrary manner that this Court is flooded with petitions after petitions challenging the orders of the Pharmacy Council of India,” said a bench led by Justice BR Gavai (now CJI) and Justice AG Masih.
Read also: Supreme Court Declares Maharashtra’s Zudpi Jungles as Protected Forests, Mandates Strict
The Court set aside PCI’s rejection orders and directed the Registrar to forward a copy of the judgment to the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The intent is to ensure that such unnecessary litigations do not happen again.
This decision came while handling 14 cases filed by pharma colleges. In one instance, an institution was initially granted permission for an extension of its D.Pharm course, but approval was revoked within a few months. The PCI claimed the college failed to submit satisfactory compliance reports on several issues.
The Court observed that the Pharmacy Council should have conducted a proper inspection before rejecting the approval and given the college a chance to address any issues found. “We find that the respondent/Pharmacy Council of India has acted in an arbitrary manner and therefore the decision dated 09.12.2024 is liable to be set aside,” the Court declared.
Read also: Supreme Court Criticizes Indian Navy Over Denial of Permanent Commission to Woman JAG Officer
The Court also noted that PCI later regularized the approval for the 2024-25 academic year after admissions of 46 students had already been granted based on the initial permission. The Court commented on PCI's “charitable attitude” in this case but reminded that, “when an action of a statutory body is likely to affect the careers of large number of students, such bodies are expected to act in a manner which is in consonance with the principles of natural justice and non-arbitrariness.”
Another case highlighted PCI’s “arbitrary attitude” when it granted an extension of approval to a college subject to year-round inspection. Even after a clean inspection report with no issues, PCI still rejected the approval.
The Court said:
“It is, thus, clear that either the inspection report is not correct, or the Council has not applied its mind to the inspection report. As already observed by us in the matter of even date, we have observed that the respondent/Pharmacy Council of India cannot act in an arbitrary manner when such an action adversely affects the careers of thousands of students.”
Read also: "In Personal Liberty Cases, High Courts Must Act Swiftly": Supreme Court Grants Bail After 27
The Supreme Court’s strong words emphasize the need for responsible conduct from expert bodies like the Pharmacy Council of India, especially when their decisions impact the future of numerous students.
Appearance: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta; Senior Advocates Devadutt Kamat, Sanjay Sharawat and Neeraj Jain
Case Title: SHREE RAM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY Versus PHARMACY COUNCIL OF INDIA, W.P.(C) No. 24/2025 (and connected cases)
