Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mr. Apputha Raj, filed a writ appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge dismissing his writ petition. The appellant had sought a writ of mandamus directing the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (the University) and Acharya & BM Reddy College of Pharmacy (the College) to recognize and reinstate him to the academic batch of 2024-2025 of the two-year M.Pharma - Drug Regulatory Affairs (DRAF) course. The appellant was admitted to the course in August 2024, but in October 2024, the University cancelled his admission on the ground that his B.Pharm degree was from a university not approved by the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), as required under Regulation 10 of the PCI (Minimum Qualification for Teachers and Other Requirements for Approval of Pharmacy Colleges) Regulations, 2014. The appellant contended that the University had not communicated this deficiency at the time of admission and that he had already completed a substantial part of the academic year. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition, holding that the appellant lacked eligibility. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka examined the PCI regulations and found that the appellant indeed did not meet the eligibility criteria. However, the court noted that the University had failed to promptly communicate the deficiency to the appellant; the admission was granted in August 2024, but the cancellation was only communicated in October 2024, after the academic year had commenced. The court held that while the cancellation was justified on merits, the University's delay in raising the objection caused prejudice to the appellant. Balancing the equities, the court directed the University to recognize the appellant as a student of the 2024-2025 batch and permit him to continue and complete the course, subject to the condition that he would not claim any right to continue if the deficiency is not cured. The appeal was allowed, and the order of the learned Single Judge was set aside.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Admission Eligibility - Cancellation of Admission - Pharmacy Council of India Regulations - The appellant's admission to M.Pharma - DRAF course was cancelled by the University on the ground that he did not possess a B.Pharm degree from a PCI-approved institution as required under Regulation 10 of the Pharmacy Council of India (Minimum Qualification for Teachers and Other Requirements for Approval of Pharmacy Colleges) Regulations, 2014. The court held that the cancellation was justified on merits but the University's failure to communicate the deficiency within a reasonable time after the academic year commenced resulted in the appellant being allowed to continue in the same batch. (Paras 1-15) B) Education Law - Writ of Mandamus - Delay in Communication - Natural Justice - The court found that the University had not communicated the deficiency in the appellant's eligibility until after the academic year had substantially progressed, causing prejudice. The court directed the University to recognize the appellant as a student of the 2024-2025 batch and permit him to complete the course, subject to the condition that he would not claim any right to continue if the deficiency is not cured. (Paras 16-25) C) Education Law - Pharmacy Council of India Regulations - Eligibility for M.Pharma - The court examined Regulation 10 of the PCI Regulations, 2014, which requires that a candidate for M.Pharma must have a B.Pharm degree from an institution approved by the PCI. The appellant's B.Pharm was from a university not recognized by the PCI, and thus he was ineligible. However, the court noted that the University had initially admitted him and only later raised the objection, leading to the equitable relief. (Paras 10-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to be recognized and reinstated to the academic batch of 2024-2025 of the M.Pharma - DRAF course despite his admission being cancelled for lack of eligibility, and whether the University's failure to timely communicate the deficiency entitles him to continue in the same batch.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.7679/2025 is set aside. The University is directed to recognize the appellant as a student of the 2024-2025 batch of M.Pharma - DRAF course and permit him to continue and complete the course, subject to the condition that he shall not claim any right to continue if the deficiency is not cured.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus
- Education law
- Admission eligibility
- University regulations
- Pharmacy Council of India regulations
- Natural justice
- Academic year recognition
