Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court adjudicated a batch of cases concerning the regulatory authority over pharmacy education in India. The dispute arose when the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) challenged the actions of various colleges that had increased their intake capacity for pharmacy courses based on approvals from the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). The colleges had approached various High Courts, which had allowed them to continue with the increased intake, holding that AICTE was the supreme authority. The PCI appealed, arguing that the Pharmacy Act, 1948 is a complete code and that PCI has exclusive jurisdiction over pharmacy education and practice. The Court examined the statutory schemes of both the Pharmacy Act and the AICTE Act. It noted that the Pharmacy Act establishes PCI as an autonomous body to regulate the profession of pharmacy, including prescribing minimum standards of education, approving courses and institutions, and registering pharmacists. The AICTE Act, on the other hand, is a general law dealing with technical education. The Court relied on its earlier decision in AICTE v. Shri Prince Shivaji Maratha Boarding House's College of Architecture, where it held that the word 'architecture' in the definition of 'technical education' under the AICTE Act must be read down to exclude architecture from AICTE's purview, as the Architects Act, 1972 is a special law. Applying the same reasoning, the Court held that the word 'pharmacy' in Section 2(g) of the AICTE Act must be dropped, and AICTE cannot regulate pharmacy education. The Court emphasized that PCI has the exclusive power to approve courses, set standards, and regulate the profession. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeals by PCI, set aside the High Court orders, and held that PCI's decisions prevail over AICTE's in matters of pharmacy education.
Headnote
A) Pharmacy Law - Regulatory Authority - Exclusive Jurisdiction of PCI - Pharmacy Act, 1948, Sections 10, 12 - The Supreme Court held that the Pharmacy Act, 1948 is a complete code dealing with the subject of pharmacy, and the PCI has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate pharmacy education, including approval of courses, minimum standards, and registration of pharmacists. The AICTE Act, 1987, being a general law, cannot override the special provisions of the Pharmacy Act. The word 'pharmacy' in Section 2(g) of the AICTE Act must be read down to exclude AICTE's regulatory power over pharmacy education. (Paras 5-10) B) Technical Education - Definition - Exclusion of Pharmacy - AICTE Act, 1987, Section 2(g) - Following the precedent in AICTE v. Shri Prince Shivaji Maratha Boarding House's College of Architecture, the Court held that the word 'pharmacy' in the definition of 'technical education' under Section 2(g) of the AICTE Act must be dropped, as the Pharmacy Act is a special law covering the field. AICTE cannot impose any regulatory measures on pharmacy courses or institutions. (Paras 5.2, 67-70) C) Education Regulations - Power of PCI - Pharmacy Act, 1948, Sections 10, 12 - The PCI is empowered under Section 10 to frame Education Regulations prescribing minimum standards of education, and under Section 12 to approve courses of study and examinations. These powers are exclusive and cannot be exercised by AICTE. (Paras 5.9-5.10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) under the Pharmacy Act, 1948, or the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) under the AICTE Act, 1987, has the authority to regulate pharmacy education, including approval of courses, intake capacity, and minimum standards.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals by PCI, set aside the High Court orders, and held that PCI has exclusive jurisdiction over pharmacy education. The word 'pharmacy' in Section 2(g) of the AICTE Act must be read down, and AICTE cannot regulate pharmacy courses or institutions.
Law Points
- Pharmacy Act
- 1948 is a complete code
- PCI has exclusive jurisdiction over pharmacy education
- AICTE cannot regulate pharmacy
- word 'pharmacy' in Section 2(g) AICTE Act must be dropped
- special law prevails over general law
