HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10303 of 2025 Court No. - 20 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent No. 1; Sri S. M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for the Pharmacy Council of India; and Ms. Aditi Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 3. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following main relief: "(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the Pharmacy Council of India, New Delhi Opposite Party No. 2, contained as Annexure no. 1 to this Writ Petition. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite Party No. 2 to grant approval to the petitioner institution for academic session 2025-26 regarding B Pharma courses and further be pleased to direct the Opposite Party No. 3 to provide the affiliation to the Petitioner institution for running the B Pharma courses for academic session 2025-26. (iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite parties to extend the benefit of judgment and order dated 19.08.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in in Writ-C No. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Aditi Tripathi, Atul Kumar Dwivedi, S M Singh Royekwar M. D. College, Amarsanda, Barabanki through its Chairman Kanhaiya Lal Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U. P. through Additional Chief Secretary Department of Technical Education U.P. Lucknow And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 7273 of 2025, contained as Annexure no. 13 to the Writ Petition." 3. This Court vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed the following order: "1. Heard Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1; Sri Sumit Tahilramani, Advocate, holding brief on behalf of Sri S. M. Singh Royekwar, learned Standing Counsel for the Pharmacy Council of India/respondent No. 2; and Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Advocate, who has filed her Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No. 3. The said vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Pharmacy Council of India has brought to the notice of this Court that the order dated 19/08/2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ - C No. 7273 of 2025 (C/M Karmyog Sewa Samiti Thru. Auth. Sign. Sri Rajendra Kumar Soni Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Tech. Edu. Lko. And 5 Others) was challenged in Special Appeal Defective No. 401 of 2025 (Pharmacy Council Of India, New Delhi Thru. Registrar-Cum Secy. Versus C/M Karmyog Sewa Samiti, Orai Thru. Its Authorised Signatory Sri Rajendra Kumar Soni And Others) wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has been pleased to pass the order dated 07/10/2025. The relevant portion (Para 17) of the said order dated 07/10/2025 is extracted here-in-under: "...17. Considering the aforesaid, prima facie case is made out for interference at this stage. We, accordingly, stay the impugned judgment qua the respondent-Institution to the extent learned Single Judge had directed the PCI-appellant to consider grant of approval under Section 12 of the Act without insisting on issuance of NOC by the State Government." 3. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2 & 3 prayed for and are granted one week's time to seek complete instructions in the matter. 4. List this case on 12/11/2025 as fresh. " 4. Today, at the very outset, Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has stated that since the petitioner institution has already applied for the approval of the B. Pharma course for the Academic Session 2026-27 on the official Portal of the Pharmacy Council of India/ respondent No. 2 herein, therefore, at this stage he feels it appropriate to obtain a decision in that regard from the Pharmacy Council of India. He prayed for liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation containing the complete facts, circumstances and reasons to establish his entitlement for the relief claimed. 5. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents have no objection to the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. WRIC No. 10303 of 2025 2 6. In view of what has been stated here-in-above, this Court finds no reason to keep the present writ petition pending at this stage. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer a representation as aforesaid before the the Pharmacy Council of India/ respondent No. 2 today i.e. on 12.11.2025. 7. It is provided that in case if the representation as aforesaid is preferred today i.e. on 12.11.2025, the same shall be considered by the Pharmacy Council of India/ respondent No. 2 and appropriate decision on the same shall be taken, strictly in accordance with law, keeping in mind the observations and the time-frame as has been fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Parshavanath Charitable Trust Versus All India Council for Technical Education & Others passed in Civil Appeal No. 9048/2012. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant writ petition is disposed of. November 12, 2025 (Manoj K.) WRIC No. 10303 of 2025 3 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench