1 Reserved on : 16.04.2026 Pronounced on : 13.07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No. 24000 OF 2023 (GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION No. 7473 OF 2025 (GM-RES), WRIT PETITION No. 12522 OF 2025 (GM-RES) IN WRIT PETITION No. 24000 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1 . SRI RAMAPPA, S/O SATYAPPA MADARKHANDI, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, KPSC REG. NO.4818, R/O NO.87, 21ST MAIN, PIPELINE ROAD, KURUBARAHALLI, BENGALURU 560 086. 2 . SRI Y VEERA NARAYANA GOWDA, S/O V YELLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, KPSC REG. NO.5444, R/O NO.154, 9TH MAIN, 14TH CROSS, LAKKASANDRA EXTN., Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka 2 BENGALURU-560 030. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI JAYAKUMAR.S PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI SATISH R GIRJI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BAGNALORE-560 001. 2 . RETURNING OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL ELECTION AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR(PROCUREMENT), NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION, 1ST FLOOR, EAST WING, NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION, AROGYA SOUDHA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU 560 023. 3 . THE REGISTRAR, KARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL, NO.541/E, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE, HAMPINAGAR, BENGALURU 560 104. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI S.S. HAVERI, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE PAPER PUBLICATION DATED 03/10/2023 VIDE ITS NO.KARAAPHAPA/PACHU/01/2022-23 AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND DIRECT THE R-2 TO PUBLISH A PROPER VOTER LIST AND 3 CONDUCT THE ELECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. B) DIRECTING THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE ANNEXURE-J AND K DATED 13/10/2023 AND 10/10/2023 AND PASS AN APPROPRIATE ORDER. IN WRIT PETITION No. 7473 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1 . SRI NAGENDRA D S, S/O LATE SUBBARAYA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NO 542, CHAITANYA, 1ST MAIN, 2ND BLOCK, BEHIND R.V TEACHERS COLLEGE, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU 560 004. 2 . SRI BHAGAVAN P S, S/O LATE SRINIVASA IYENGAR P N, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/AT NO 175, GROUND FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, KGE LAYOUT, RMV EXTENSION 2ND STAGE, SANJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU 560 094. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI CHANDRASHEKAR P PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001. 2 . THE COMMISSIONER, 4 FOOD PROTECTION AND PHARMACY ADMNISTRATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001. 3 . THE REGISTRAR, KARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL, NO.541/E, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE, HAMPINAGAR, BENGALURU 560 104 4 . C. JAYARAMAIAH, S/O LATE CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O NO.339, BAGALUR VILLAGE, YELAHANKA ROAD, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, PINCODE: 561 149 (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 10-12-2025) ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI S.S HAVERI, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI H.R SHOWRI, ADVOCATE FOR R-4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) QUASH THE PAPER PUBLICATION DATED 28.02.2025 VIDE NOTIFICATION NO. FDA/56/YOJANE/2023-24, PUBLISHED ON 01.03.2025 IN VIJAYA KARNATAKA, KANNADA DAILY NEWS PAPER (BENGALURU EDITION) ISSUED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A. (B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION VIDE ANNEXURE-C DATED. 07.03.2025 AND PASS AN APPROPRIATE ORDER. 5 IN WRIT PETITION No. 12522 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1 . SRI GANGADHAR V YAVAGAL, S/O. VEERABHARAPPAYAVAGAL, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT NO.889, 18TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010. 2 . SRI D.A. GUNDURAO, S/O. AHOBALARAO, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/AT 22/7, MGK MURTHY ROAD, CHAMARAJPETE, BENGALURU-560 018. 3 . SRI Y. VEERANARAYANAGOWDA, S/O. V. YALLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT 154, 14TH CROSS, LAKKASANDRA EXTENSION, BENGALURU-560 030. 4 . MRS. SALMA KHANUM, W/O. MOHAMED SHAFEEULLA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 125, 15TH CROSS, PATELS INN CLUB R.T. NAGAR, 2ND BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 032 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI CHANDRASHEKAR P PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY 6 WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2 . THE UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 3 . THE COMMISSIONER, FOOD SAFETY AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 4 . THE REGISTRAR, KARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL, NO.541/E, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE, HAMPINAGAR, BENGALURU 560 104. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI S S HAVERI, ADVOCATE FOR R-4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) QUASH THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2025 IN NO. AKUKU 44 IMM 2025, BENGALURU, PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; (B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED 11.04.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND PASS AN APPROPRIATE ORDER. THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 16.04.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- 7 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CAV ORDER Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 is filed challenging the paper publication issued for the conduct of elections to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council; Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025 is filed seeking quashment of a paper publication issued for nomination of members to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council and Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 is preferred challenging the appointment of an Administrator to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council. In the light of the issue revolving round the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council and conduct of elections to it or otherwise, these petitions are taken up together and considered by this common order. The petitioners in all the Writ Petitions are members of the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council. 2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: - 2.1. The Karnataka State Pharmacy Council (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Council’ for short) is constituted. The Council is regulated under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 8 ‘the Act’ for short) and the Rules promulgated thereto under the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’ for short). On 08-05-2022, a press note comes to be published stating that, pursuant to the Government Notification dated 05-03-2022, the Returning Officer had been appointed and that the elections to the Council are being announced, asking pharmacists to register themselves as voters for election to the Council. On 17-11-2022 the Returning Officer communicates to the Registrar of the Council, requesting for the details of the members registered with the Council. On 03-12-2022, another letter is addressed to the Registrar of the Council by the Returning Officer, requesting for details of all the life/permanent members of the Council in order to invite objections prior to the elections. On 21-04-2023, the Registrar, submits the list of pharmacists registered with the Council to the Returning Officer and informs her that the total number of registered pharmacists eligible to vote as on 25-04-2023 were 43,434 in number. Subsequently, the Returning Officer, published the list of eligible voters on 29-04- 2023, wherein the total number of eligible voters were 43,434 in number. 9 2.2. On 03-10-2023, an election notification comes to be issued by the Returning Officer, under Section 19(a) of the Act, notifying the elections and also revising the calendar of events notified earlier. A paper publication is also issued notifying the elections to the Council. A legal notice is then issued to the Returning Officer on 10-10-2023, on the score that the notification dated 03-10-2023 was issued in violation of the Act and the Rules. Thereafter, another notification comes to be issued by the Returning Officer on 12-10-2023, in terms of which, the total number of eligible voters was increased to 48,974 voters. This list also included those voters who registered between 01-04-2023 to 15-07-2023. A representation is submitted to the Returning Officer calling in question the notification dated 03-10-2023 and also the subsequent notification dated 13-10-2023 on the score that, it was issued in violation of the Act and Rules as it failed to disclose the total number of eligible voters and the categories for which they could contest and that since the elections were to commence from 16-10-2023, the voters list issued three months prior i.e., the list existing on 16-07-2023 should be the basis for the list of voters. A 10 clarification is then issued by the Returning Officer that, the nomination papers would be issued from 16-10-2023 to 31-10-2023. It is argued by the petitioners that, this notification marks a departure from the calendar of events issued on 03-10-2023. Another representation is submitted on 21-10-2023, requesting an updated list of voters since, as per notification dated 12-10-2023 additional voters were added to the list. This representation also is not considered. It is then the litigation crops up and Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 comes to be filed before this Court, challenging the notification dated 03-10-2023 and also seeking for a direction to consider the representations dated 10-10-2023 and 13-10-2023. This Court on 30-10-2023 issued an interim order, staying the aforesaid elections on the score that there was violation of Section 40(3)(a) of the Act. 2.3 Later, the Commissioner, Department of Food and Drug Administration (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’ for short), issues a notification on 21-02-2025 for the nomination of members to the Council. The notification is published on the website of the Council on 28-02-2025. The notification lists certain 11 eligibility criteria for the applicants for nomination to the Council, including that, applicants must possess a pharmacist license and must have carried out business as pharmacists for a period of 15 years in the State of Karnataka to be eligible to apply. A paper publication then comes to be issued publishing the said notification, thereby inviting applications of eligible persons. Aggrieved by the eligibility criteria in the notification, a representation is issued to the Commissioner requesting him not to nominate any person and to hold that, conditions 4 to 8 of the eligibility criteria are to be held as not applicable, for the purpose of applying for nomination to the Council. Non-consideration of this representation, leads to filing of Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025 before this Court. On 18-03-2025, this Court passed an interim order, staying the notification for appointment of nominated members to the Council. 2.4. Thereafter, on 05-04-2025, an order is issued by the Government of Karnataka appointing the Commissioner as the Administrator of the Council, thereby dissolving the existing governing body of the Council. The order comes to be issued on the score that, several complaints came to be filed against the Council 12 members alleging harassment in renewing registrations, illegal investment of Council funds without permission, etc. The Council members are also alleged to have not cooperated with the Government for conducting elections to the Council in the previous years. Further, it is stated that, the pharmacy inspectors were appointed by the Council in violation of the government conditions and reservation policies and that the Council members failed to maintain updated copies of the Register of Pharmacists. The Drug Controller is stated to have submitted a report after conducting an investigation into the allegations. The report submitted showed abuse of power by the members of the Council and serious administrative irregularities. Aggrieved by the appointment of the Administrator, a representation is submitted on 11-04-2025, seeking for review of the order dated 05-04-2025. The representation is not considered and Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 is filed, seeking for quashing of the order appointing an Administrator and for a direction to consider the representation dated 11-04-2025. Thereafter, an interim order is passed by this Court, linking Writ Petition Nos.24000 of 2023 and 7473 of 2023 with Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 on the score that, the 13 grievance of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 can be addressed if the elections to the Council were held at the earliest and any undertaking or direction would be ineffective if Writ Petition Nos.24000 of 2023 and 7473 of 2023 are not considered. Therefore, the matters, as observed hereinabove, are taken up and heard together. 3. Heard Sri Jayakumar S.Patil, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023; Sri Chandrashekar P.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos.7473 and 12522 of 2025, Smt. Navya Shekar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 in Writ Petition Nos.24000 of 2023 and 7473 of 2025 and respondents 1 to 3 in Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025; Sri S.S. Haveri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 in Writ Petition Nos.24000 of 2023 and 7473 of 2025 and respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 and Sri H.R.Showri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025. 14 4. The learned senior counsel Sri Jayakumar S.Patil appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 would contend that, the returning officer of the Council is wanting to hold elections to the Council in violation of Rules 3 to 20 of the Rules and in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice. In terms of Rule 3(2) of the Rules, elections cannot be conducted without a proper voters list and the list comprised voters whose names appear with the register of Pharmacists maintained by the Council as last printed under Section 40 of the Act together with the list published by the returning officer. There were several names of persons registered subsequent to the finalization of the list. He would submit that under Section 40(3)(a) of the Act, the list for the election was required to be published three months before the ordinary election to the Council was to be held. But, new members were added to the list after publication of the calendar of events. The returning officer of the Council failed to mention valid voters list while issuing the calendar of events, instead the modified voters list included new members. About 9071 members who did not renew their membership for the years 2023-24 were added as voters in violation of the Act and the Rules. Nominations of candidates were 15 accepted without any due identification of their candidature by printing their registration number only. Despite being notified about the violation in the conduct of elections, the Council failed to clarify the same. The elections were therefore, being conducted without a proper voters list and identification of ineligible voters. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos.7473 of 2025 would contend that the Commissioner, issued a paper publication of eligible persons for nomination as members to the Council without having any power to do so under the Act or the Rules. The Commissioner is only an ex-officio member in terms of Section 19(dd) and does not have the power of filling up posts of nominated members under the Act. Further, the eligibility criteria imposed by the Commissioner for nomination of members to the Council is in violation of the provisions of Section 19(b) of the Act. Therefore, the notification or publication of eligible voters list is contrary to law. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 would submit that the membership of members 16 to the Council would continue till the successor if duly nominated or elected under the provisions of the Act. The only authority or power for the respondent - state was only the appointment of the commission of enquiry under Section 45 of the Act, under which an Administrator cannot be appointed. The State Government only has supervisory power over the Council and do not have absolute control over the Council. The delay in conduct of elections was solely due to the State Government and not the elected members of the Council. The learned counsel would further submit that if the issues arising in the companion petitions are decided, no additional submissions need be made in the case at hand as the appointment of the Administrator is a consequence of orders impugned in the companion petitions. 7. Per contra, the learned learned Additional Government Advocate representing the respondent Nos.1 and 2, in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023, would vehemently contend that last elections to the Council took place 20 years ago on 19-04-2003. In terms of the Act, the membership to the Council has to be renewed every year but earlier people who became members in 1970’s and 1980’s were 17 life time members. After 2003 when the last elected body came into existence, all the members including the life members were asked to renew their membership every year. The writ petition therefore, must be viewed in that angle but there have been constant attempts made over the years to stall elections on some ground or the other. The Returning Officer in continuation of her duty to hold elections had notified a voters list appropriately in terms of the Act and the Rules. There was no warrant to challenge the said notification again stalling the conduct of elections. The returning officer had followed all the procedures before finalizing the voters list. The duplication of members was removed and even otherwise it would not affect the outcome of the election. She would seek dismissal of these petitions in contending that elections must be directed to be held as 23 years have passed by now without any new elected body coming into existence. Further, Section 40(3)(a) of the Act requires that the list of updated members is to be published three months prior to the commencement of the election process and new members registered/renewed between 01-04-2023 to 15-07-2023 has to be included. The Rules provide for the publication of an additional list subsequent to the publication 18 of the list of members finalized on the 1st of April every year which is the cut of date as provided under Section 40(1) of the Act for the register to be published. Since the process of elections was to commence from 16-10-2023, it was required that the updated voters list was to be published by 15-07-2023. However, since on 29-04-2023, the list of voters had already been published with the cut off date as 1st April, 2023, new members registered as well as the renewed members thereafter up until 15-07-2023 had to to be included in the voters list as provided under Section 40(3)(a) of the Act. The learned Council for the respondent No.3 - Council, in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023, would toe the lines of the learned Additional Government Advocate in contending that the election notification was not issued in violation of the provisions of the Act and that there are no irregularities in the list of voters published by the respondent No.2. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 in Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025 would contend that the petitioners have an experience of more than two decades in the field of pharmacy and therefore have no locus standi to file this Writ 19 Petition as they can not be aggrieved by the eligibility criteria requiring the applicant to have an experience of 15 years in the filed of the pharmacy. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, in Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025, would toe the lines of the counsel for the respondent No.4 in contending that there are no violations of the Act or the Rules while imposing the said eligibility criteria in the notification calling for applications for nomination to the Council. 9. Further, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 would contend that the Writ Petition is not maintainable as the petitioners do not have a fundamental or statutory right to continue as members of a body dissolved in accordance with governing statute and administrative procedure. The petitioners have also approached this Court without exhausting their statutory remedies. The State Government upon receiving several complaints alleging mal-administration and mismanagement of funds, exercising its powers under Section 19 of the Act, issued the 20 government order dissolving the Council. The decision was taken in public interest owing to the receipt of the said complaints pertaining to administrative mal practices, non-compliance with the Act and Rules including Section 28 of the Act. The Council being a statutory body functioning under delegated powers of the State Government, its existence and constitution are subject to compliance with the statutory provisions. A report was drawn after investigation into the said complaints. The report states that the Council despite the passage of sixteen years has not conducted any elections. Among the six elected members, two embers were serving as members for over 20 years. Further, the term of the nominated members ended in the year 2021, however, they continued to remain in power without obtaining any government order. For the smooth functioning of the Council, the Administrator was appointed with immediate effect. Nominated and elected members of a dissolved body do not have the vested right to continue after its lawful dissolution. Decisions taken in public interest to ensure transparency and good governance override individual interests of members of such bodies. There is no violation of principles of natural justice as the dissolution pertains to the collective functions 21 of the Council and not any punitive action against the petitioners individually. 10. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 11. The afore-narrated facts are all a matter of record and they would not require any reiteration. Before embarking upon consideration of each petition individually, I deem it appropriate to notice the statutory landscape upon which consideration of the issue in the lis arises. 11.1. The Pharmacy Act, 1948 governs the constitution and functioning of the Central and State Pharmacy Councils. Sections 2, 19, 22, 24, 25, 28, 32, 40 and 45 of the Act are the ones that are relevant to be considered. They read as follows: “… … … 2. Interpretation.— In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,— … … … 22 (h) ‘register’ means a register of pharmacists prepared and maintained under Chapter IV; (i) ‘registered pharmacist’ means a person whose name is for the time being entered in the register of the State in which he is for the time being residing or carrying on his profession or business of pharmacy; (j) ‘State Council’ means a State Council of Pharmacy constituted under Section 19, and includes a Joint State Council of Pharmacy constituted in accordance with an agreement under Section 20; … … … CHAPTER III STATE PHARMACY COUNCILS 19. Constitution and composition of State Councils.—Except where a Joint State Council is constituted in accordance with an agreement made under Section 20, the State Government shall constitute a State Council consisting of the following members, namely:— (a) six members, elected from amongst themselves by registered pharmacists of the State; (b) five members, of whom at least three shall be persons possessing a prescribed degree or diploma in pharmacy or pharmaceutical chemistry or registered pharmacists, nominated by the State Government; (c) one member elected from amongst themselves by the members of each Medical Council or the Council of Medical Registration of the State, as the case may be; (d) the chief administrative medical officer of the State ex officio or if he is unable to attend any meeting, a person authorized by him in writing to do so; 23 (dd) the officer-in-charge of drugs control organization of the State under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940] (23 of 1940) ex officio or if he is unable to attend any meeting, a person authorised by him in writing to do so; (e) the Government Analyst under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940), ex officio, or where there is more than one, such one as the State Government may appoint in this behalf: Provided that where an agreement is made under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 20, the agreement may provide that the State Council to serve the needs of the other participating State also shall be augmented by not more than two members, of whom at least one shall at all times be a person possessing a prescribed degree or diploma in pharmacy or pharmaceutical chemistry or a registered pharmacist, nominated by the Government of each of the said other participating States, and where the agreement so provides, the composition of the State Council shall be deemed to be augmented accordingly. … … … 22. Incorporation of State Councils.—Every State Council shall be a body corporate by such name as may be notified by the State Government in the Official Gazette or, in the case of a Joint State Council, as may be determined in the agreement, having perpetual succession and a common seal, with power to acquire or hold property both movable and immovable and shall by the said name sue and be sued. … … … 24. Mode of elections.—Elections under this chapter shall be conducted in the prescribed manner, and where any dispute arises regarding any such election, it shall be referred to the State Government whose decision shall be final. 25. Term of office and casual vacancies.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a nominated or elected member, other than a nominated President, shall hold office for a term of five years from the date 24 of his nomination or election or until his successor has been duly nominated or elected, whichever is longer. (2) A nominated or elected member may at any time resign his membership by writing under his hand addressed to the President, and the seat of such member shall thereupon become vacant. (3) A nominated or elected member shall be deemed to have vacated his seat if he is absent without excuse sufficient in the opinion of the State Council from three consecutive meetings of the State Council, or if he is elected under clause (a) or (c) of Section 19 or 21, if he ceases to be a registered pharmacist or ceases to be a member of the Medical Council or Council of Medical Registration of the State, as the case may be. (4) A casual vacancy in the State Council shall be filled by fresh nomination or election, as the case may be, and the person nominated or elected to fill the vacancy shall hold office only for the remainder of the term for which the member whose place he takes was nominated or elected. (5) No act done by the State Council shall be called in question on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy in, or any defect in the constitution of, the State Council. (6) Members of the State Council shall be eligible for re-nomination or re-election. … … … 28. Information to be furnished.—(1) The State Council shall furnish such reports, copies of its minutes and of the minutes of the Executive Committee, and abstracts of its accounts to the State Government as the State Government may from time to time require and copies thereof shall be sent to the Central Council. (2) The State Government may publish, in such manner as it may think fit, any report, copy, abstract or other information furnished to it under this section. … … … 25 32. Qualifications for subsequent registration.— (1) After the date appointed under sub-section (2) of Section 30 and before the Education Regulations have, by or under Section 11, taken effect in the State, a person who has attained the age of eighteen years shall on payment of the prescribed fee be entitled to have his name entered in the register if he resides or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy in the State and if he— (a) satisfies the conditions prescribed with the prior approval of the Central Council, or where no conditions have been prescribed, the conditions entitling a person to have his name entered on the first register as set out in Section 31, or (b) is a registered pharmacist in another State, or (c) possesses a qualification approved under Section 14: Provided that no person shall be entitled under clause (a) or clause (c) to have his name entered on the register unless he has passed a matriculation examination or an examination prescribed as being equivalent to a matriculation examination. (2) After the Education Regulations have by or under Section 11 taken effect in the State, a person shall on payment of the prescribed fee be entitled to have his name entered on the register if he has attained the age of eighteen years, if he resides, or carries on the business or profession of pharmacy, in the State and if he has passed an approved examination or possesses a qualification approved under Section 14 or is a registered pharmacist in another State. … … … CHAPTER IV REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS … … … 40. Printing of register and evidentiary value of entries therein.—(1) As soon as may be after the 1st day of April subsequent to the commencement of the Pharmacy 26 (Amendment) Act, 1959 (24 of 1959), the Registrar shall cause to be printed copies of the register as it stood on the said date. (2) The Registrar shall thereafter cause to be printed as soon as may be after the 1st day of April in each year copies of the annual supplement to the register referred to in sub-section (1), showing all additions to, and other amendments in, the said register. (3) (a) The register shall be brought up-to-date three months before ordinary elections to the State Council are held and copies of this register shall be printed. (b) The provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply to the register as so printed as they apply to the register referred to in sub-section (1). (4) The copies referred to in sub-section (1) or sub- section (2) or sub-section (3) shall be made available to persons applying therefore on payment of the prescribed charge and shall be evident that on the date referred to in the register or annual supplement, as the case may be, the persons whose names are entered therein were registered pharmacists. … … … 45. Appointment of Commission of Enquiry.—(1) Whenever it appears to the Central Government that the Central Council is not complying with any of the provisions of this Act, the Central Government may appoint a Commission of Enquiry consisting of three persons, two of whom shall be appointed by the Central Government, one being the Judge of a High Court, and, one by the Council; and refer to the matters on which the enquiry is to be made. (2) The Commission shall proceed to enquire in such manner as it may deem fit and report to the Central Government on the matters referred to it together with such remedies, if any, as the Commission may like to recommend. 27 (3) The Central Government may accept the report or remit the same to the Commission for modification or reconsideration. (4) After the report is finally accepted, the Central Government may order the Central Council to adopt the remedies so recommended within such time as may be specified in the order and if the Council fails to comply within the time so specified, the Central Government may pass such order or take such action as may be necessary to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission. (5) Whenever it appears to the State Government that the State Council is not complying with any of the provisions of this Act, the State Government may likewise appoint a similar Commission of Enquiry and pass such order or take such action as specified in sub- sections (3) and (4).” Section 2(h) defines the term 'register' as the register maintained under Chapter IV of the Act. In terms of Section 2(i) of the Act, a 'registered pharmacists' is a person whose name is entered within the register of the State. Chapter III of the Act deals with the establishment of the State Pharmacy Councils. Section 19 of Chapter IV of the Act, provides for the constitution and composition of the State Councils. Section 19(a) of the Act provides that, the Council shall consist of six members elected by the registered pharmacists from amongst themselves and Section 19(b) of the Act, states that that five members would be nominated by the 28 State Government to the Council, of whom atleast three would be persons possessing a degree or diploma in pharmacy or registered as a pharmacist. In terms of Section 19(dd) of the Act, an officer in-charge of the Drugs Control Organization of the State under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 would be the ex-officio Chairman of the Council. Section 24 deals with the mode of elections. It would be in the manner prescribed. The prescription would be under the Rules. Further, in the event of any dispute pertaining to the elections, the decision of the State Government would be final. Chapter IV of the Act deals with the procedure for registration of pharmacists. Section 40 of Chapter IV of the Act, deals with printing of the register and evidentiary value of entries printed in the register. Section 40(2) provides that, after the 1st day of April each year, the Registrar shall print an annual supplement to the register showing all the additions and other amendments made to the register. Section 40(3)(a) mandates that the register should be up to date, three months before the ordinary election to the State Council and copies of that register are to be printed. Copies so printed should be made available to persons applying therefore on payment of the prescribed charges. Section 45(5) of the Act 29 provides for the appointment of a Commission of Enquiry by the State Government, whenever there appears to have been any violation of the provisions of the Act by the State Councils. The Commission of Enquiry is to pass any order or take any such action as provided under Sections 45(3) and (4) of the Act. 11.2. Then come the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968, formulated under the provisions of the Act. The Rules that are relevant to be noticed are Rules 2, 3 and 4 of the Rules. They read as follows: “… … … 2. Definitions: In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires. (a) "Act" means the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (Central Act 8 of 1948); (b) "Council" means the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council constituted under Section 19; … … … (j) "Returning Officer" means the Returning Officer appointed by the Government for conducting elections under Chapter III of the Act; … … … PART II ELECTION OF THE STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL ELECTION UDNER SECTION 19(a) 30 3. Publication of Election Calendar. - (1) In the case of election held for the first time under clause (a) of Section 19, the Returning Officer shall issue a notice to the electorate apprising it of the election and requiring it to elect the members within the date mentioned in the notice. Such notice shall be published in the Karnataka Gazette and in such other manner as the Returning Officer thinks fit. The Returning Officer shall also publish in the Karnataka Gazette a notice in Form A inviting nominations. (2) In case of elections other than those held for the first time under clause (a) of Section 19, the President shall as soon as conveniently may be, after the appointment of the Returning Officer, issue a notice to the electorate apprising it of the vacancy and requiring it to elect the members within the date mentioned in the notice. Such notice shall be published in the Karnataka Gazette and in such other manner as the President thinks fit. On the publication of such notice, the Returning Officer shall forthwith publish in the Karnataka Gazette a notice in Form A inviting nominations. (3) The Council (or the Government in the case of first election) shall appoint and shall notify in the Karnataka Gazette and in such other manner as it thinks fit for. (a) the last date for the receipt of nomination papers; (b) the date and time for the scrutiny of nomination papers; (c) withdrawal of candidature; (d) the date for the final publication of the names of candidates; (e) the last date for the despatch of voting papers under Rule 10(1); and (f) the last date for the receipt of voting papers and the counting of votes. … … … 31 4. List of voters. - (1) The first register published under sub-section (4) of Section 30 as amended in the manner specified in sub-section (5) of Section 30 shall be the final electoral roll for the first election under Section 19(a). (2) The register, as last printed under Section 40, together with the list or lists published by the Returning Officer of Pharmacists registered subsequent to the printing of the Register, shall be the final electoral roll for the subsequent election under clause (a) of Section 19. (3) Copies of the electoral roll containing the name, qualification and addresses of the electors shall be made available for sale at a price not exceeding rupees two to be fixed by the President or the Government in the case of that election, as the case may be." (Emphasis supplied at each instance) Rule 2(j) of the Rules defines who is a ‘Returning Officer’. Rule 3 deals with publication of election calendar and Rule 4 deals with the list of voters. Part II of the Rules deal with elections to the State Pharmacy Council provided under Section 19(a) of the Act. In terms of Rule 3(2) of the Rules, elections to be held under Section 19(a) of the Act, would begin with the appointment of a returning officer who would issue a notice to the electorate apprising it of the vacancy and requiring it to elect members within the date mentioned in the notice. Such notice should be published in the Karnataka Gazette, for inviting nominations. The list of voters 32 mentioned in the Register as found in Rule 4(2) must be the list last printed under Section 40 of the Act, together with the list or lists published by the Returning Officer of Pharmacists registered subsequent to the printing of such register. The list which includes Pharmacists registered subsequent to the printing of the register shall be the final electoral roll for the subsequent election under clause (a) of Section 19 of the Act. 12. In light of the aforesaid statutory landscape governing the constitution and conduct of elections for the State Council, each petition is now required to be considered on its merit. WRIT PETITION NO.24000 OF 2023: 13. Since the challenge in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 is against the notification issued on 03-10-2023, through which the elections to the Council come to be notified, the said notification is required to be noticed. The notification/clarification issued on 03-10-2023, notifying the conduct of elections, reads as follows: 33 The aforesaid notification was issued under Rule 3(1)(2) of the Rules for conducting elections in accordance with Section 19(a) of the Act. The revised Calendar of Events also comes to be notified for conducting the elections. As per the Calendar of Events, the date of commencement of the elections and issuance of the 34 nomination papers was on 16-10-2023 and the last date of receiving the nomination papers was on 31-10-2023. The elections were to conclude by 18-12-2023. 14. It is the contention of the petitioners that the aforesaid notification was issued in violation of Rule 3(2) of the Rules and Section 40(3)(a) of the Act. It is argued that the elections cannot be conducted without a proper list of voters; that the up to date list was to be published 3 months prior to the commencement of elections and that there were certain irregularities in the list of eligible voters which was published by the Returning Officer. Therefore, the timelines in the case at hand are required to be noticed: 08-05-2022 A press note is issued by the Returning Officer asking the pharmacists to register themselves with the Council 29-04-2023 The Returning Officer publishes the list of eligible voters which are a total of 43,434 in number. This list is to be published 3 months prior to the conduct of elections, in accordance with Section 40(3)(a) of the Act. 03-10-2023 The notification is issued, notifying the elections to the Council under Section 19(a) of the Act and also notifying the calendar of events. This notification comes to be published close to seven months after 35 the publication of the list of eligible voters, published on 29-04-2023. The Form-A as provided under Rule 3(2) of the Rules was also issued inviting applications/nominations for the elections. 10-10-2023 A legal notice is issued against the notification dated 03-10-2023. 12-10-2023 A new notification is issued by the Returning Officer notifying the additional list of voters, thereby increasing the total number of registered pharmacists who are eligible to vote to 48,974 voters. As per this notification, the pharmacists whose registration was restored and also those who registered between 01-04-2023 to 15-07-2023 were also allowed to vote and contest in the elections. Publication of this additional list is provided under Section 40(2) of the Act. 13-10-2023 Another representation is submitted against the publication notifying the elections on 03-10-2023 and also against the subsequent notification dated 12-10-2023 increasing the list of eligible voters. 16-10-2023 As per the calendar of events provided in the notification dated 03-10-2023, the nomination papers were to be issued on 16-10-2023. This was considered to be the date for commencement of elections. 30-10-2023 The aforesaid nomination papers were to be submitted by 30-10-2023 in terms of the calendar of events. If the aforesaid timelines are noticed, it is clear that there is no violation of the provisions of the Act or the Rules while notifying the elections. The argument of the petitioners that the final list of voters was not published along with the notification dated 36 03-10-2023 is only to be rejected, for the reason that neither the Act nor the Rules, as noted supra specify that the list of voters is to be published along with the notification of elections. Therefore, the notification dated 03-10-2023, notifying the elections to the Council, does not deserve interference at the hands of this Court. 15. Rule 4(2) of the Rules noted supra clearly provides what would constitute the final electoral roll for subsequent elections under Section 19(a) of the Act. It would comprise of the register last printed under Section 40 of the Act along with the registers printed by the Returning Officer subsequent to the register printed under 40 of the Pharmacy Act. The law is replete with judicial precedents emphasizing the importance of the preparation of electoral rolls and delineating the scope of interference by constitutional courts in proceedings challenging such electoral rolls. It therefore becomes apposite to notice a few judgments. 37 15.1. The Apex Court in P.T. RAJAN v. T.P.M. SAHIR1 has held as follows: “… … …. 37. The purport and object of preparation of an electoral roll cannot be underestimated in view of the fact that thereby the persons included therein make the persons to decide as to whether they can contest election wherefor an enlistment of a voter is necessary. Electoral roll is also helpful for the candidates to assess their chance of success. For reference to the final electoral roll, it is also required by the candidates to enable them to canvass amongst the voters. Availability of a final electoral roll with the candidate is, thus, a matter of great importance for him. There cannot further be any doubt whatsoever that the right to vote having regard to Section 62 of the 1951 Act vis-à-vis Article 326 of the Constitution of India is a valuable right. A person in terms of Section 62 of the 1951 Act is entitled to exercise his right of franchise or is disabled therefrom if his name does or does not find place in the electoral roll. … … …. 48. Furthermore, even if the statute specifies a time for publication of the electoral roll, the same by itself could not have been held to be mandatory. Such a provision would be directory in nature. It is a well- settled principle of law that where a statutory functionary is asked to perform a statutory duty within the time prescribed therefor, the same would be directory and not mandatory. (See Shiveshwar Prasad Sinha v. District Magistrate of Monghyr [AIR 1966 Pat 144: ILR 45 Pat 436 (FB)], Nomita Chowdhury v. State of W.B. [(1999) 2 Cal LJ 21] and Garbari Union Coop. Agricultural Credit Society Ltd. v. Swapan Kumar Jana [(1997) 1 CHN 189].)” 1 (2003) 8 SCC 498 38 The Apex Court holds the purport and object of preparation of an electoral roll cannot be underestimated in view of the fact that the persons included therein make the persons to decide as to whether they can contest election or otherwise. Therefore, preparation of final electoral roll thus assumes great importance for any election or for any candidate thereof. Further, The Apex Court holds that, even if the statute specifies a time for publication of the electoral roll, the same by itself cannot be held to be mandatory as it is a well settled principle that when a statutory functionary is asked to perform a statutory duty within the time prescribed thereof, unless a consequence is notified it becomes directory. 15.2. Earlier to the afore-quoted judgment, the Apex Court in the case of CHIEF COMMISSIONER, AJMER v. RADHEY SHYAM DANI2 had amplified the essence of preparation of an appropriate electorate roll and held as follows: “… … …. 13. It is of the essence of these elections that proper electoral rolls should be maintained and in order that a proper electoral roll should be maintained it is necessary that after the preparation of the electoral 2 (1956) 2 SCC 564 39 roll opportunity should be given to the parties concerned to scrutinise whether the persons enrolled as electors possessed the requisite qualifications. Opportunity should also be given for the revision of the electoral roll and for the adjudication of claims to be enrolled therein and entertaining objections to such enrolment. Unless this is done, the entire obligation cast upon the authorities holding the elections is not discharged and the elections held on such imperfect electoral rolls would acquire no validity and would be liable to be challenged at the instance of the parties concerned. It was in our opinion, therefore, necessary for the Chief Commissioner to frame rules in this behalf, and insofar as the Rules which were thus framed omitted these provisions they were defective.” 15.3. The High Court of Rajasthan in KUSHAL CHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN3 holds as follows: “… … …. 10. A Full Bench of this Court consisting of D.M. Bhandari, L.N. Chhangani and B.P. Beri, J. (as they then were) in Atma Singh's case (supra) observed as under:— “It will neither be reasonable nor proper to hold that non-compliance of the provisions of the Act relating to pre-election matters can form the subject matter of investigation in an election petition. Such matters can hardly be an appropriate subject for investigation by an Election Tribunal. Thus. S. 34 provides for questioning an election for errors and defects in the conduct of election committee by the returned candidate or by the Returning Officer. The election, therefore, cannot be set aside by an Election Tribunal for any mistake in the preparation of electoral roll.” It was further observed therein as follows: 3 1986 SCC OnLine Raj 49 40 “The process of election starts by issuing of a notification calling upon a constituency to elect a member or members. Before such a notification can be issued, a number of preliminary steps have to be taken under the law. The law has laid down the manner in which these things are to be done. There may arise cases in which the authorities have failed to perform their functions in accordance in law in doing these things Sometimes the transgression of law may be inexcusable and of such a serious nature that a court may be persuaded to take the view that the bedrock to hold elections is missing. In such circumstances, a citizen may apply to this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution for issuing of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the State Govt. to perform these things in accordance with law and the High Court in an appropriate case may in its discretion issue such a writ or direction restraining the Government to hold election.” Thus, in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court, pre- election disputes can only be challenged in the manner either provided by the Act or the Rules concerning them or by an appropriate writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. … … … 14. Mohinder Singh Gill's case (supra) came up for consideration. Lakshmi Charan Sen's case (supra) wherein it was observed as under: “The fact that certain claims for inclusion of names in electoral rolls and objections relating to inclusion of certain names therein are not finally disposed of, even assuming that they are filed in accordance with law cannot arrest the process of election to the legislature. The election has to be held on the basis of the electoral roll which is in force on the last date for making nominations. The fact that the revision of electoral rolls, either intensive or summary, is undertaken by the Election Commission does not have the effect of putting the electoral roll last published in cold storage. The revision of electoral rolls is a continuous process which has to go on, elections or no elections. Various provisions contained in S. 21 indicate that if an electoral roll is not revised, its validity and continued operation remain unaffected at least in a class of cases. That exemplifies an important 41 principle, which applies in the case of electoral rolls. S. 21(3) of the Act of 1950 confers upon the Election Commission the power to direct a special revision of the electoral roll. The proviso to that sub-section also says that until the completion of the special revision so directed, the electoral roll for the time being in force shall continue to be in force. That proves the point that Election Laws abhor a vacuum. In so far as the electoral rolls are concerned there is never a moment in the life of a political community when some electoral roll or the other is not in force. Section 23(3) of the said Act also points in the same direction. It is not suggested that claims and objections filed in the prescribed form should not be decided promptly and in accordance with law. But the important point which must be borne in mind is that whether or not a revision of an electoral roll is undertaken and, it undertaken whether or not it is completed, the electoral roll for the time being in force must hold the field.” It was further observed as under: “Thus, the fact that an appeal is pending under r. 23(1) against the decision of a Registration Officer under r. 20, 21 or 21A does not constitute an impediment to the publication of the roll and to the roll, upon such publication, coming into force. Rule 20 provides for inquiry into claims and objections; Rule 21 provides for inclusion of names which are left out of the roll, owing to inadvertence or error; while, Rule 21-A provides for the deletion of names of dead persons and of persons who cease to be or are not, ordinary residents of the particular constituency. Notwithstanding the fact that the roll contains these errors and they have remained to be corrected or that the appeals in respect thereof are still pending, the Registration Officer is under an obligation to publish the roll by virtue of Rule 22.” Thus, absolute finality is attached to the electoral rolls in force for the time being. These provisions of the Representation of the People Act are almost similar to the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Much stress was laid on the passage quoted hereinabove from the Halsbury's Laws of England, Edn. 2, Vol 12 under the heading “Commencement of the Election.” Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Lakshmi Charan Sen's case (supra) observed that 42 in Mohinder Singh Gill (supra) Krishna Iyer, J., speaking for the Constitution Bench, has considered at great length the scope and meaning of Art. 329(b) of the Constitution. It was further observed as under: “Describing that Article as the “Great Wall of China”, the learned Judge posed the question whether it is so impregnable that it cannot be by passed even by Art. 226. Observing that “every step from start to finish of the total process constitutes ‘election not merely the conclusion or culmination’ the judgment concludes thus: “The rainbow of operations, covered by the compendious expression ‘election’ thus commences from the initial notification and culminates in the declaration of the return of a candidate.” While agreeing with the aforesaid observations of Mohinder Singh Gill's case, their Lordships further observed as follows: “We have expressed the view that preparation and revision of electoral rolls is a continuous process, not connected with any particular election. It may be difficult, consistently with that view, to hold that preparation and revision of electoral roll is a part of the election’ within the meaning of Art. 329(b)” Thus, the upshot of the entire observation of their Lordships has been that the expression ‘election’ commences from the initial notification and culminates in the declaration of the return of a candidate and that preparation and revision of electoral rolls being continuous process, not connected with any particular election cannot be held to form part of the election within the meaning of Article 329(b) of the Constitution. Of course, even after these observations, it has been observed that perhaps, as stated in Halsbury in the passage extracted in Ponnuswami (supra) the facts of each individual case may have to be considered for determining the question whether any particular stage can be said to be a part of the election process in that case and in that event it should be to formulate a proposition which will apply to all cases alike. These observations may relate to the case where the revision of electoral rolls is made 43 permissible even after to the publication of the notification or it may relate to the cases where even after the publication of the notification, any particular process which is otherwise a pre-election matter is made part of the election process by any law or Rules framed thereunder and not otherwise. So far as the preparation of the Electoral Rolls under ss. 10 and 11 of the Act and under rr. 6 to 12-B of the Rules is concerned, the preparation of the electoral rolls is not related to any particular election and, therefore, any error illegality kept in preparation of the electoral rolls cannot be challenged by way of an election petition under r. 78(d)(iv) of the Rules. 15. It has been observed in Hapuram's case (supra) that it is true that an election petition under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act can also be entertained where one of the grounds being non-compliance of the Act and the Rules which is in perimateria with the provisions of r. 78(d)(iv) of the Rules but the Division Bench and Full Bench of this Court as well as their Lordships of the Supreme Court have categorically held in a number of authorities quoted hereinabove that any illegality or irregularity committed in the preparation of electoral rolls cannot be made the basis of an election petition and, therefore, these observation clinch the issue and admit if no other interpretation than the one taken by us above. Even while quoting the above said passage from Halsbury's Law of England their Lordships of the Supreme Court have observed in Lakshmi Charan Sen's case that preparation of electoral rolls being a continuous process unconnected with any particular election, it will be difficult to hold consistently with that view that preparation and revision of an electoral roll is a part of election process which means that inspite of these observations of the Halsbury's Law of England, their Lordships of the Supreme Court recorded a categorical finding that preparation of the electoral roll is not a part of the election process. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the submission of Mr. M. Mridul, learned counsel for the non-petitioners that because the decision regarding rejection of the objection petitions was given at a time holding of the Panchayat elections was imminent and, 44 therefore, any illegality or irregularity committed in preparation of the electoral rolls should form part of the election process which could only be agitated by an election petition and not otherwise in view of the aforesaid conclusion arrived at by us, this contention does not find favour with us.” (Emphasis supplied at each instance) The High Court holds that any illegality or irregularity committed in the preparation of electoral rolls cannot be made the basis of an election petition and is always a subject matter of writ petition. The preparation of electoral roll is an important step towards an election but not the election itself. 16. Now the representations are required to be noticed. These representations, had been submitted by the petitioners with regard to illegal drawing of members into the electoral roll. The representation dated 13-10-2023 would read as follows: “Date:13-10-2023 From: Mr. Ashok Madarkhandi, KSPC Reg.No.37776 #681, 3rd Block, 6th Main, BEL Lay-out, Vidyaranyapura, Bengaluru-560 097. To Smt. Soumya N.Gowda, Returning Officer, 45 Election Karnataka State Pharmacy Council And Deputy Director (Procurement) National Health Mission, Arogya Soudha, 1st Floor East Wing, Magadi Road, Bengaluru- 560 023. Respected Madam, Sub: Election of six member to the Karnataka state Pharmacy Council. Respected Madam, the following are hereby brought to your information: 1. Pursuant to your good self’s appointment as Returning Officer, to conduct elections to elect 6 members to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, your good-self published a notification dated 3-10-2023 for the election of office bearers for the period expiring on the December 23, 2028. 2. The notification fails to disclose the total number of eligible voters, corresponding cut off registration dates to be eligible to vote and also contest, for different categories, and further to that the elections are to be conducted for the council members who will hold position till December 23, 2028. 3. On 4-10-2023 Sri Ganghadhar V.Yavagal, President, Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, had published calendar of events for the elections as per which, the election process commences with issue of nomination papers from 16-10-2023 and concludes 16-12-2023 date of declaration of result. 4. I wish to bring to your good self’s kind notice that without the number of list of voters, based on the cut-off dates arrived and notified on 4-10-2023, is contrary to sub- clause (2) of Clause (3) of Rule (3) of Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968 read with Clause (a) of Sub- Section 3 of Section 40 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 and thus the same is barred from being considered and used as the list of eligible persons to vote or contest the elections as explained in details below. 46 5. Explanation. 1. Part-II of Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules 1968 governs and mandates the provisions relating to holding of the election. 2. Rule No.3-20 (including sub-rules thereof) of part-II of the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968 prescribes the exact number of conducting election and other connected and related matters. a. As per Clause sub-clause (2) of Clause (4) of Rules 3 of the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968, the list of voters comprises of those whose name appears in the register of pharmacists maintained by the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, as last printed under Section 40 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, together with list or lists published by the returning officer, containing the names of persons, who are registered subsequent to the printing of the register. b. As per clause (a) of Sub-clause 3 of Section 40 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, the Registrar of Pharmacists shall be made up to date three months, prior to ordinary elections to the State council are held and copies of this register shall be printed. c. As per clause sub-clause (3) of clause (4) of sub-Rule 3 of the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968, copies of the electoral roll containing the name, qualification and addresses of the electors shall be made available for sale at a price not exceeding Rs.2 to be fixed by the President or the Government I n the case of the election, as the case may be. d. Prima facie it is evident that the list of voters reckoned by your goodself and published on 4-10-2023, is not in accordance with the legal provisions explained above. e. Since the process of elections commenced from 16-10- 2023, the Register updated by the Karnataka State 47 Pharmacy Council, 3 months prior i.e., on 16-07-2023 shall be the basis for the list of voters. Under the circumstances, the anomaly may be please be set right. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sd/- Ashok Madarkhandi Registered Pharmacist Reg.No.37776” Earlier to the aforesaid representation, a legal notice dated 10-10-2023 is issued to the Returning Officer seeking for an explanation regarding the violation of the Pharmacy Act and Rules while issuing the notification dated 03-10-2023. The legal notice reads as follows: "Date:-10/10/2023 Place:-Bangalore Legal Notice To Smt Soumya N Gowda, Returning Officer, Election Karnataka State Pharmacy Council And Deputy Director (Procrument) National Health Mission, Arogya Soudha, 1st Floor East Wing, Magadi Road, Bangalore 560023. Respected Madam, Sub: Election of Six members to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, 48 This Notice is being duly served on your Office to take required actions and further steps. Respected Madam, the following are hereby brought to your information, 1. Pursuant to your good self's appointment as Returning Officer, to conduct elections to elect 6 members to the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, your good self published a notification dated 03/10/2023 for the election of office bearers for the period expiring on the December 23 2028. 2. The notification fails to disclose the total number of eligible to vote and also contest, for different categories, and, voters, corresponding cut off registration dates to be eligible further to that the elections are to be conducted for the Council Members who will hold position till December 23 2028. 3. On 04/10/2023, Sri Ganghadhar V Yavagal, President Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, had published calendar of events for the elections as per which, the election process commences with issue of nomination papers from 16/10/2023 and Concludes 16/12/2023, declaration of result. 4. I wish to bring to your good self's kind notice that without the number of list of voters, based on the Cut-off dates Clause (2) of Clause (3) of Rule (3) of Karnataka State 04/10/2023, is contrary to Sub Pharmacy Council Rules, 1968 read with Clause (a) of Sub Section 3 of Section 40 of The Pharmacy Act 1948 and thus the same is barred from being considered and used as the list of eligible persons to vote or contest the elections as explained in detail below. 5. Explanation 49 1. Part II of Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules 1968 Governs and mandates the provisions relating to holding of the election. 2. Rule No. 3 -20 (including Sub rules thereof) of Part II of The Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules 1968 prescribes the exact manner of conducting election and other connected and related matters. a. As per Clause Sub clause (2) of Clause (4) of Rule 3 of the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rules 1968, the list of voters comprises of those whose name appears in the register of pharmacists maintained by the Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, as last printed under Section 40 of The Pharmacy Act 1948, together with list or lists published by the Returning Officer, containing the names of persons, who are registered subsequent to the printing of the Register. b. As per clause a of Sub Section 3 of Section 40 of the Pharmacy Act 1948, the Registrar of pharmacists shall be made up to date three months, prior to ordinary elections to the state council are held and copies of this register shall be printed c. As per clause Sub clause (3) of clause (4) of Sub Rule 3 of Karnataka State Pharmacy Council Rule 1968, copies of the electoral roll containing the name, qualification and Addresses of the electors shall be made available for sale at a price not exceeding Rs. 2 to be fixed by the President or the Government in the case of the election, as the case may be. d. Prima facie it is evident that the list of voters reckoned by your good self and published on 04/10/2023, is not in accordance with the legal provisions explained above. e. Since the process of elections commences from 16/10/2023, the Register updated by the 50 Karnataka State Pharmacy Council, 3 months prior i.e., on 16/07/2023 shall be the basis for the list of voters. Under the circumstances, the anomaly may be please be set right Thanking you Yours Faithfully Sd/- Advocate (Neeraj Nirmal)" Yet another representation was submitted on 21-10-2023 which is also necessary to be noticed. It reads as follows: “Date: 21-10-2023 From: Y.Veera Narayana Gowda, KSPC Reg.No.5444, No.154, 9th Main, 14th Cross, Lakkasandra Extn., Bangalore-560030. To Smt. Sowmya N.Gowda, Returning Officer, KSPC Karnataka & Deputy Director Procurement, Rashtriya Arogya Abhiyana, Arogya Soudha, Magadi Road, Bangalore-560 023. Subject: Request for an updated and authorised electoral list for the upcoming election of Karnataka State Pharmacy Council. Dear Madam, I am a registered pharmacist (registered in 1982 with Reg.No.5444 and renewed up to December 2023) and I am writing to formally request an updated and authorised voter 51 list for the upcoming KSPC election as I am actively contesting as a candidate. I recently observed in the letter dated 3-10-2023 published on 4-10-2023.(No………….) that the total voter list was reported as 32,434. However, in the letter dated 12-10- 2023 published on 13-10-2023 (No…………….) it was stated that an additional 5544 (2157+3387) authorised voters were included in that list. As a registered pharmacist and a candidate in the upcoming elections, it is essential for me to have access to the most accurate and up to date information regarding the voters. I also kindly request that, since the calendar of events for the election was officially announced on 4-10-2023, there should have not been any further changes or alterations to the voter list to ensure the integrity and fairness of the electoral process. Any modifications should have been made before the announcement of calendar of events to guarantee the stability and reliability of the voter list during the election period. Given the importance of ensuring the integrity and transparency of the election process, it is essential that I am provided with the exact number of eligible voters. I kindly request you to provide me an updated voter list that includes the exact number of eligible voters as of the latest date attested by you. I am willing to pay the necessary charges to obtain the authorised list. Thank you, Yours sincerely, Sd/- Y.Veera Narayana Gowda.” The representations quoted supra apart from challenging the notice dated 03-10-2023 also seek clarification with regard to the final 52 voters list and the modifications made to the list subsequently. Any amount of dissent that is projected by the learned counsel for the respondents, to the petitioners challenge to the election notification dated 03-10-2023, would not mean that consideration of the representations also would not happen. If election has to be in terms of law or in terms of what is prescribed, the notification notifying the voters list should also be redone or otherwise only after consideration of those representations in strict consonance with law. Representations are quoted hereinabove. Therefore, without setting aside the notification dated 03-10-2023 which is challenged in Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023, I deem it appropriate to direct the Returning Officer to consider those representations, in respect of the notified voters list, examine the contentions raised therein, and, if necessary, re-notify the voters list. WRIT PETITION NO.7473 OF 2025: 17. In Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025, what is challenged is the notification dated 28-02-2025 and the subsequent paper publication issued on 01-03-2025, publishing the aforesaid 53 notification. Therefore, it becomes necessary to consider the said notification. It reads as follows: "GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA FOOD SAFETY AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION NOMINATION OF MEMBERS TO THEKARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL (KSPC), VIJAYA NAGAR, BANGALORE REF. NO: FDA/56/YOJANE/2023-24 Dt. 21/02/2025 Date of publication in website: 28/02/2025 Last date for submission: 10/03/2025 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR NOMINATED MEMBERS TO THE KARNATAKA STATE PHARMACY COUNCIL (KSPC) Eligibility criteria Documents to be submitted 1 Shall be a citizen of India and a resident of Karnataka for the past 15 years. Domicile certificate for 15 years or relevant certificates showing residence for 15 years in Karnataka 2 Shall have a full time Degree or Diploma in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry from a recognized Board set up by the Government. Relevant document to show candidate is holding full time Degree or Diploma in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry from a recognized Board set up by the Government 3 Shall not be an elected member under clauses (a) or (c) of Section 19 or 21 of the Pharmacy Act Self attested declaration stating that the candidate is not a member of the Medical Council or Council of Medical registration of the State 54 4 Shall possess a Pharmacist license and carried out business for the past 15 years in the State of Karnataka. Valid Registration certificate issued by KSPC and proof of business like business license. 5 Shall have good antecedents with no criminal complaints. Affidavit declaring No criminal complaints against the candidate on Rs. 100/- stamp paper 6 No tax dues of any type to the Government. An Affidavit on Rs. 100/- stamp paper to be submitted. Self-attested copy of relevant document viz., PAN card/IT returns copy etc., 7 Shall not been debarred or removed from holding any posts nominated or elected in any councils/ body of state government or private organization Self attested declaration about the same 8 Can be a teaching staff not below the rank of Associate professor in any Pharmacy college and having a post graduation in Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical chemistry, Pharmacology or Pharmacognosy Relevant certificates attested by the Management/Principal of the college/University to be submitted. 9 Address proof like Aadhaar card/ Voters ID/Driving license To be submitted. Note: 1. The applicant shall enclose the documents sought above under Eligibility criteria along with the application form. 55 2. The applicants shall submit the application with relevant documents by hand or by registered post on or before the last date of submission. 3. Preference shall be given to Women candidate and candidate from Hyderabad Karnataka region (371J). 4. The member so nominated from the State government should represent themselves in a manner which doesn't go against the Government objectives and concern. 5. For any further query/assistance related to applications only, contact :-Smt. Pramila ND, Chief Scientific Officer, DTL, Bangalore. Mobile No.: 9880969628 Sd/- Commissioner Food Safety and Drug Administration Karnataka" (Emphasis added) The notification is issued by the Commissioner, for nomination of members to the Council under Section 19(b) of the Act. Section 19(b) provides that five members shall be nominated by the State Government, of whom at least three shall be persons possessing the prescribed degree or diploma in Pharmacy or Pharmaceutical Chemistry or are registered pharmacists. For the purpose of such nomination, the notification also prescribes certain eligibility criteria. Condition (4) of the eligibility criteria in the notification, makes it mandatory for an applicant to not only possess a valid pharmacist licence, but should also have been carrying on business in the State of Karnataka for a minimum period of fifteen years. 56 18. It is the contention of the petitioners that the aforesaid condition is contrary to Section 19(b) of the Act and that the notification impermissibly introduces an additional eligibility criterion not contemplated by the statute. If Section 19(b) of the Act is noticed, it nowhere stipulates that a person nominated thereunder must have been carrying on business, or possess experience, as a pharmacist for a period of fifteen years. This contention of the petitioners merits acceptance. 19. It is a well settled principle of law that, when the Act prescribes the eligibility criteria or qualifications, the executive cannot, by notification or executive instructions, impose additional qualifications unless the Act delegates such authority. A notification issued or the conditions imposed by way of such a notification by the executive, cannot travel beyond the provisions of the Act. It therefore becomes germane to notice a few judicial precedents on this issue: 57 19.1. The Apex Court in the case of AMARAGOUDA L. PATIL (DR.) v. UNION OF INDIA4, observes as follows: "…… …… …… 46. It would also be pertinent to highlight that though the third respondent averred in his application (in pursuance to the Notification) that he was the head of the department/organisation since May 2008, a contention which we have rejected, it is also plain and clear that he misrepresented his work experience for being considered for the coveted position of Chairperson of the Commission. What the consequence of an illegal appointment could be, needs no emphasis. 47. The only escape route, which could have potentially saved the selection of the third respondent from interference, is conferment of a power by the statute on the appointing authority to relax the essential qualification(s). Responding to our query, Mr. Banerjee frankly submitted that the NCH Act did not confer any such power of relaxation on the appointing authority. This obliterates the final beacon of hope for the third respondent. 48. The Division Bench has referred to the case of Tajvir Singh Sodhi v. State of Jammu and Kashmir19 delivered by this Court to hold that the scope of interference is limited. Paragraph 66 has been referred to, which reads thus: “66. Thus, the inexorable conclusion that can be drawn is that it is not within the domain of the Courts, exercising the power of judicial review, to enter into the merits of a selection process, a task which is the prerogative of and is within the expert domain of a Selection Committee, subject of course to a caveat that if there are proven allegations of malfeasance or violations of statutory rules, only in such cases of inherent arbitrariness, can the Courts intervene.” 4 2025 SCC OnLine SC 297 58 49. While there can be no gainsaying that interference should be limited, particularly when a merit review is sought as in Tajvir Singh Sodhi (supra), the decision does acknowledge that interference could still be made if there are proven allegations of malfeasance or violations of statutory rules, laying bare inherent arbitrariness in the process. This decision too reinforces the legal position that if any of the grounds on which judicial review of administrative action is shown to exist, interference on such ground would be well-nigh permissible. It is not an arena in which intervention is completely barred. 50. In the case of Sushil Kumar Pandey v. High Court of Jharkhand20, this Court while considering the departure from the statutory rules midway through the selection procedure held that the statutory rules must be given primacy in any selection process. “22. We find from Rule 18 of the 2001 Rules, the task of setting cut-off marks has been vested in the High Court but this has to be done before the start of the examination. Thus, we are also dealing with a situation in which the High Court administration is seeking to deviate from the Rules guiding the selection process itself. We have considered the High Court's reasoning for such deviation, but such departure from statutory rules is impermissible. We accept the High Court administration's argument that a candidate being on the select list acquired no vested legal right for being appointed to the post in question. But if precluding a candidate from appointment is in violation of the recruitment rules without there being a finding on such candidate's unsuitability, such an action would fail the Article 14 test and shall be held to be arbitrary. The reason behind the Full Court Resolution is that better candidates ought to be found. That is different from a candidate excluded from the appointment process being found to be unsuitable.” 51. We hold that in the matter of essential qualifications prescribed by the statute, there should neither be any deviation from the statutory requirements nor the advertisement inviting applications while conducting any selection process, unless power to relax the qualifications is shown to exist. 59 52. Having said that, there is one other aspect which needs to be briefly dealt with. The Division Bench observed that unless mala fides are proved, the Courts should adopt a hands-off approach. Broadly speaking, there could be little quarrel with such proposition. However, bearing in mind the facts and circumstances, we hold that the Division Bench grossly erred in failing to consider that mala fides, in the sense of malice in fact, i.e., actual malice, is not the only condition for interference; it is open to a Court to interfere when legal malice or malice in law is demonstrated to exist. 53. In Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania21, this Court discussed the concept of ‘malice in law’. Profitable reference may be made to the following passages: “25. The State is under obligation to act fairly without ill will or malice— in fact or in law. ‘Legal malice’ or ‘malice in law’ means something done without lawful excuse. It is an act done wrongfully and wilfully without reasonable or probable cause, and not necessarily an act done from ill feeling and spite. It is a deliberate act in disregard to the rights of others. Where malice is attributed to the State, it can never be a case of personal ill will or spite on the part of the State. It is an act which is taken with an oblique or indirect object. It means exercise of statutory power for ‘purposes foreign to those for which it is in law intended’. It means conscious violation of the law to the prejudice of another, a depraved inclination on the part of the authority to disregard the rights of others, which intent is manifested by its injurious acts. … 26. Passing an order for an unauthorised purpose constitutes malice in law. …” 54. Again, in the case of R.S. Garg v. State of U.P.22, this Court applied this principle to service disputes by holding as follows: “26. “Malice” in its legal sense means malice such as may be assumed for a wrongful act done intentionally but without just cause or excuse or for one of reasonable or probable 60 cause. The term “malice on fact” would come within the purview of the aforementioned definition. Even, however, in the absence of any malicious intention, the principle of malice in law can be invoked as has been described by Viscount Haldane in Shearer v. Shields [[1914] A.C. 808 : 83 LJPC 216 : 111 LT 297 (HL)] AC at p. 813 in the following terms: ‘A person who inflicts an injury upon another person in contravention of the law is not allowed to say that he did so with an innocent mind; he is taken to know the law, and he must act within the law. He may, therefore, be guilty of malice in law, although, so far as the state of his mind is concerned, he acts ignorantly, and in that sense innocently.’ ……” 55. Furthermore, in the case of Swaran Singh Chand v. Punjab SEB23, this Court held that non-compliance of the State's own directions would constitute malice in law. We quote the relevant passage hereunder: “8. It is furthermore well settled that when the State lays down the rule for taking any action against an employee which would cause civil or evil consequence, it is imperative on its part to scrupulously follow the same. Frankfurter, J. in Vitarelli v. Seaton [3 L.Ed.2d 1012 : 359 US 535 (1959)] stated : (US pp. 546-47) ‘An executive agency must be rigorously held to the standards by which it professes its action to be judged. … Accordingly, if dismissal from employment is based on a defined procedure, even though generous beyond the requirements that bind such agency, that procedure must be scrupulously observed. … This judicially evolved rule of administrative law is now firmly established and, if I may add, rightly so. He that takes the procedural sword shall perish with that sword.’ … 18. In a case of this nature the appellant has not alleged malice of fact. The requirements to comply with the directions contained in the said Circular Letter dated 14-8-1981 were necessary to be complied with in a case of this nature. Non- compliance wherewith would amount to malice in law……Thus, when an order suffers from malice in law, neither any averment as such is required to be made nor strict proof thereof is 61 insisted upon. Such an order being illegal would be wholly unsustainable.” (emphasis supplied) 56. Based on the above, there is little doubt that the State, here the UoI, has exercised a power for a purpose which is foreign to that for which the power in law is intended. Viewed from this perspective, the act of appointing the third respondent as Chairperson despite he not having the requisite experience suffers from malice in law. 57. We hasten to add that whenever appointment to a public office is sought to be made, irrespective of the nature of the office, the rules prescribing mandatory eligibility criteria must be applied in a strict manner; after all, every public appointment under Article 16 of the Constitution must be fair, non-arbitrary and reasonable. Tested on this touchstone, the appointment of the third respondent fails to pass muster." 19.2. Later, the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HARYANA v. KRISHAN KUMAR5, observes as follows: "…… …… …… 55. After perusal of the contents of the advertisement issued by the State of Haryana, it reveals that in addition to the educational qualification prescribed under Rule 49 of the Drugs Rules which is similarly specified in the Rules of 2018, it is contended that the candidates who applied for the post of DI/DCO may not be eligible unless they possess the experience as enumerated in the Rules of 2018. If we look into the advertisement issued by the State of Karnataka whereby, they have added experience in the nature of ‘minimum’ qualification. Therefore, by virtue of the Rules of 2018 or the Rules of 2013, the States of Haryana and Karnataka have made the qualification of experience a ‘minimum 5 2026 SCC OnLine SC 79 62 qualification’, which under Drug Rules, was prescribed only for Inspectors for the purpose of inspection under Rule 52. In our view, such recourse is contrary to the central law i.e., the D&C Act which is primary in nature. It is further required to be observed that on conjoint reading of Section 103 of the GOI Act and Article 372 of the Constitution of India, if the respective States wish to derive power for prescribing the qualification for appointment of Inspector, they may take the recourse as permissible by way of making an amendment in the D&C Act, as made by the State of Maharashtra for certain provisions. In absence of such amendment or repeal, adding experience as prescribed in the respective State Rules as ‘minimum qualification’ for appointment to the post of DI/DCO is completely inconsistent with the recourse permissible. Further, when the subject was already occupied by the primary legislation, therefore, such recourse may not be countenanced under the law. 56. In view of the above, it is concluded that the powers so exercised either by the State of Haryana or Karnataka to prescribe such qualifications for appointment of Inspector, over and above the provisions of the Drug Rules, is completely alien, in particular when the subject was already occupied by the Central Government and the rules have been framed by it. Once it has been held that State Governments do not have the power to legislate on the issue in the manner as done, and the recourse as permissible has not been taken, the question of repugnancy is not required to be dealt with. In such view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh or the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru have interpreted the provisions in right earnest and rightly allowed the writ petitions filed by the participants, assailing the addition of experience as an essential qualification to participate in the process of selection. Therefore, the question nos. (i) and (ii) are answered accordingly." (Emphasis supplied at each instance) 63 The Apex Court, in the afore-quoted judgments, observes that where the statute prescribes the essential qualifications, there can be no deviation from the statutory requirements, nor can an advertisement or notification inviting applications for a selection process prescribe qualifications at variance with those contained in the statute, unless the power to relax or modify such qualifications is expressly conferred. Further, where the governing statutory provisions have already prescribed the requisite qualifications, additional eligibility conditions cannot be introduced. 20. If the notification dated 28-02-2025 is tested on the anvil of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the same deserves to be quashed, as the eligibility conditions prescribed therein travel beyond the provisions of the Act. Consequently, the subsequent paper publication dated 01-03-2025, issued pursuant to the said notification, also deserves to be quashed. WRIT PETITION NO.12522 OF 2025: 21. In Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025, what is challenged is the appointment of an administrator, pursuant to the Council being 64 dissolved. The said appointment happens in terms of the government order dated 05-04-2025. The order reads as follows: "““““ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ನಡವಗಳ ನಡವಗಳ ನಡವಗಳ ನಡವಗಳ ಷಯ: ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಆಡತ ಮಂಡಯನು% ರದು&'ೊ, ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯನು% ೇ-ಸುವ ಕುತು. ಓದ/ಾ01ೆ: ಆಯುಕ ರು, ಆ2ಾರ ಸುರಕ*ೆ ಮತು ಔಷದ ಆಡತ ಇವರ ಏಕಕಡತ ¸ÀASÉå:DCDHO/PLN/28/2025-DDC2DCDHO/PLN/28/2025DDC2(168359) ಪ67ಾ ವೆ: 8ೕ/ೆ 8ೕ/ೆ 8ೕ/ೆ 8ೕ/ೆ ಓದ/ಾದ ಓದ/ಾದ ಓದ/ಾದ ಓದ/ಾದ ಆಯುಕ ರ ಆಯುಕ ರ ಆಯುಕ ರ ಆಯುಕ ರ ಏಕ ಏಕ ಏಕ ಏಕ ಕಡತದ9: ಕಡತದ9: ಕಡತದ9: ಕಡತದ9:,,,, ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು 16 ವಷ=ಾದರೂ ವಷ=ಾದರೂ ವಷ=ಾದರೂ ವಷ=ಾದರೂ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಇದುವೆಗೂ ಇದುವೆಗೂ ಇದುವೆಗೂ ಇದುವೆಗೂ ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ನAೆಸ1ೆ ನAೆಸ1ೆ ನAೆಸ1ೆ ನAೆಸ1ೆ Bಂ1ೆ Bಂ1ೆ Bಂ1ೆ Bಂ1ೆ ಚುಾCಸಲEಟF ಚುಾCಸಲEಟF ಚುಾCಸಲEಟF ಚುಾCಸಲEಟF 06 ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ GೈI GೈI GೈI GೈI ಇಬKರು ಇಬKರು ಇಬKರು ಇಬKರು ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು ಸು<ಾರು 20 ವಷಗಂದ ವಷಗಂದ ವಷಗಂದ ವಷಗಂದ ಸದಸರುಗLಾ0 ಸದಸರುಗLಾ0 ಸದಸರುಗLಾ0 ಸದಸರುಗLಾ0 ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ ಾಯ MವBಸು ದು& MವBಸು ದು& MವBಸು ದು& MವBಸು ದು&, ಅ1ೇ ಅ1ೇ ಅ1ೇ ಅ1ೇ ೕ ೕ ೕ ೕ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಾಮM1ೇಶನ'ೊಂ ಾಮM1ೇಶನ'ೊಂ ಾಮM1ೇಶನ'ೊಂ ಾಮM1ೇಶನ'ೊಂQರುವ Qರುವ Qರುವ Qರುವ 05 ಜನ ಜನ ಜನ ಜನ ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ ಸದಸರ ಅವ+ ಅವ+ ಅವ+ ಅವ+ 2021 ೆR ೆR ೆR ೆR ಮು0Oದ&ರೂ ಮು0Oದ&ರೂ ಮು0Oದ&ರೂ ಮು0Oದ&ರೂ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ Sಾವ61ೇ Sಾವ61ೇ Sಾವ61ೇ Sಾವ61ೇ ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಪAೆಯ1ೇ ಪAೆಯ1ೇ ಪAೆಯ1ೇ ಪAೆಯ1ೇ ಅ+ ಾರದ9: ಅ+ ಾರದ9: ಅ+ ಾರದ9: ಅ+ ಾರದ9: ಮುಂದುವೆOರು*ಾ ೆ ಮುಂದುವೆOರು*ಾ ೆ ಮುಂದುವೆOರು*ಾ ೆ ಮುಂದುವೆOರು*ಾ ೆ. ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ರುದT ರುದT ರುದT ರುದT ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು Chemist & Druggist ಸಂಘಟೆಗಳ ಸಂಘಟೆಗಳ ಸಂಘಟೆಗಳ ಸಂಘಟೆಗಳ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಸದಸಾದ ಸದಸಾದ ಸದಸಾದ ಸದಸಾದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಪಷನ ಾಯ=ೈಖ ಾಯ=ೈಖ ಾಯ=ೈಖ ಾಯ=ೈಖ, PÀvÀðªÀå /ೋಪ /ೋಪ /ೋಪ /ೋಪ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ದುಬಳ ೆ ದುಬಳ ೆ ದುಬಳ ೆ ದುಬಳ ೆ ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು ದೂರುಗಳನು% ದೂರುಗಳನು% ದೂರುಗಳನು% ದೂರುಗಳನು% WXೕ WXೕ WXೕ WXೕ £ÁUÀgÁdÄ JA.J¸ï. gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀºÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.03.2023gÀ°è ¤ÃrzÀÄÝ, CªÀÅUÀ¼À°è ಪXಮುಖ=ಾ0 ಪXಮುಖ=ಾ0 ಪXಮುಖ=ಾ0 ಪXಮುಖ=ಾ0 ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ರವರ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ 1ೋಷಗಳ 1ೋಷಗಳ 1ೋಷಗಳ 1ೋಷಗಳ, ಏಕಪ\ೕಯ ಏಕಪ\ೕಯ ಏಕಪ\ೕಯ ಏಕಪ\ೕಯ M]ಾರಗಳ M]ಾರಗಳ M]ಾರಗಳ M]ಾರಗಳ £ÉÆÃAzÀt ನೕಕರಣ ನೕಕರಣ ನೕಕರಣ ನೕಕರಣ <ಾಡುವ9: <ಾಡುವ9: <ಾಡುವ9: <ಾಡುವ9: ಾಮಸFಗ'ೆ ಾಮಸFಗ'ೆ ಾಮಸFಗ'ೆ ಾಮಸFಗ'ೆ Mೕಡು Mೕಡು Mೕಡು Mೕಡು ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ Bಂ7ೆ Bಂ7ೆ Bಂ7ೆ Bಂ7ೆ, Iರುಳಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡ Iರುಳಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡ Iರುಳಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡ Iರುಳಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡ ಅೇಕ ಅೇಕ ಅೇಕ ಅೇಕ ದೂರು ದೂರು ದೂರು ದೂರು 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಹಣವನು% ಹಣವನು% ಹಣವನು% ಹಣವನು% ಾನೂನು ಾನೂನು ಾನೂನು ಾನೂನು _ಾBರ=ಾ0 _ಾBರ=ಾ0 _ಾBರ=ಾ0 _ಾBರ=ಾ0 Mutual Fundsಗಳ9: ಗಳ9: ಗಳ9: ಗಳ9: ಹೂQರುವ ಹೂQರುವ ಹೂQರುವ ಹೂQರುವ ಬ'ೆ ಬ'ೆ ಬ'ೆ ಬ'ೆ, ಇ/ಾ`ೆಯ ಇ/ಾ`ೆಯ ಇ/ಾ`ೆಯ ಇ/ಾ`ೆಯ Bಯ Bಯ Bಯ Bಯ ಅ+ ಾSಾದ ಅ+ ಾSಾದ ಅ+ ಾSಾದ ಅ+ ಾSಾದ ಅಪರ ಅಪರ ಅಪರ ಅಪರ ಔಷದ ಔಷದ ಔಷದ ಔಷದ MಯಂತXಕರ MಯಂತXಕರ MಯಂತXಕರ MಯಂತXಕರ ರವರು ರವರು ರವರು ರವರು ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ದೂನ ದೂನ ದೂನ ದೂನ ಬ'ೆa ಬ'ೆa ಬ'ೆa ಬ'ೆa ತM`ೆಯನು% ತM`ೆಯನು% ತM`ೆಯನು% ತM`ೆಯನು% ೈ'ೊಂಡು ೈ'ೊಂಡು ೈ'ೊಂಡು ೈ'ೊಂಡು Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ ಮತು ಮತು ಮತು ಮತು ಪಷ ನ9: ಪಷ ನ9: ಪಷ ನ9: ಪಷ ನ9: ಆ0 ಆ0 ಆ0 ಆ0ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ಅ+ ಾರ ದುಬಳ ೆಯ ದುಬಳ ೆಯ ದುಬಳ ೆಯ ದುಬಳ ೆಯ ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ:31.01.2024 ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% MೕQರು*ಾ ೆ MೕQರು*ಾ ೆ MೕQರು*ಾ ೆ MೕQರು*ಾ ೆ. ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು ತಮc ತಮc ತಮc ತಮc ಪತX ಪತX ಪತX ಪತX ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ: ಔMಇ ಔMಇ ಔMಇ ಔMಇ/34/=ೈ =ೈ =ೈ =ೈ/2022-23 Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ: 14.03.2024ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ತM`ಾ ತM`ಾ ತM`ಾ ತM`ಾ ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ಸ9: ಸ9: ಸ9: ಸ9: ಸೂಕ ಸೂಕ ಸೂಕ ಸೂಕ ಕXಮವನು% ಕXಮವನು% ಕXಮವನು% ಕXಮವನು% ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೋರು*ಾ ೆ ೋರು*ಾ ೆ ೋರು*ಾ ೆ ೋರು*ಾ ೆ. 65 ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಆ1ೇ ಆ1ೇ ಆ1ೇ ಆ1ೇಶಶಶಶ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ:ಆಕುಕ ಆಕುಕ ಆಕುಕ ಆಕುಕ 40 ಐಎಂಎಂ ಐಎಂಎಂ ಐಎಂಎಂ ಐಎಂಎಂ 2016, _ೆಂಗಳgರು _ೆಂಗಳgರು _ೆಂಗಳgರು _ೆಂಗಳgರು Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ: 28.01.2022ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ 10 ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಇನhGೆಕF[ ಇನhGೆಕF[ ಇನhGೆಕF[ ಇನhGೆಕF[ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗು 'ೆ ಗು 'ೆ ಗು 'ೆ ಗು 'ೆ ಆ]ಾರದ ಆ]ಾರದ ಆ]ಾರದ ಆ]ಾರದ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 11 ಂಗಳ ಂಗಳ ಂಗಳ ಂಗಳ ಅವ+'ೆ ಅವ+'ೆ ಅವ+'ೆ ಅವ+'ೆ ೇ- ೊಳdಲು ೇ- ೊಳdಲು ೇ- ೊಳdಲು ೇ- ೊಳdಲು 15 ಷರತು ಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡಂ*ೆ ಷರತು ಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡಂ*ೆ ಷರತು ಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡಂ*ೆ ಷರತು ಗಳೊ%ಳ'ೊಂಡಂ*ೆ ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% ಆ1ೇಶವನು% Mೕಡ/ಾ0ತು Mೕಡ/ಾ0ತು Mೕಡ/ಾ0ತು Mೕಡ/ಾ0ತು . ಆದೆ ಆದೆ ಆದೆ ಆದೆ, ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಅಧiರು ಅಧiರು ಅಧiರು ಅಧiರು ಅಥ=ಾ ಅಥ=ಾ ಅಥ=ಾ ಅಥ=ಾ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ Y7ಾZ[ ರವರು ರವರು ರವರು ರವರು ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಅ+ಸೂಚೆಯ9: ಅ+ಸೂಚೆಯ9: ಅ+ಸೂಚೆಯ9: ಅ+ಸೂಚೆಯ9: ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ ರುವ ಷರತು ಷರತು ಷರತು ಷರತು 04 ರಂ*ೆ ರಂ*ೆ ರಂ*ೆ ರಂ*ೆ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ MಯಂತXಕರವಂದ MಯಂತXಕರವಂದ MಯಂತXಕರವಂದ MಯಂತXಕರವಂದ =ೇತನ =ೇತನ =ೇತನ =ೇತನ MಗOಪQ ೊಳd1ೇ MಗOಪQ ೊಳd1ೇ MಗOಪQ ೊಳd1ೇ MಗOಪQ ೊಳd1ೇ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ಕXಕXಕXಕX. ಸಂ ಸಂ ಸಂ ಸಂ. 08 & 09 ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ದ ದ ದ ದ -ೕಸ/ಾಯನು% -ೕಸ/ಾಯನು% -ೕಸ/ಾಯನು% -ೕಸ/ಾಯನು% ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ Gಾ9ಸ1ೇ Gಾ9ಸ1ೇ Gಾ9ಸ1ೇ Gಾ9ಸ1ೇ ಏ ಾಏI ಏ ಾಏI ಏ ಾಏI ಏ ಾಏI ತಮ'ೆ ತಮ'ೆ ತಮ'ೆ ತಮ'ೆ _ೇ ಾದ _ೇ ಾದ _ೇ ಾದ _ೇ ಾದ ೕಯ9: ೕಯ9: ೕಯ9: ೕಯ9: ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಇನ7ೆEಕF[ ಇನ7ೆEಕF[ ಇನ7ೆEಕF[ ಇನ7ೆEಕF[ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ೇ- ೊಂಡು ೇ- ೊಂಡು ೇ- ೊಂಡು ೇ- ೊಂಡು ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆ ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆ ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆ ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆ. ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ Y7ಾZ Y7ಾZ Y7ಾZ Y7ಾZ[ [ [ [ DV ಾಯMವBಸು ರುವ ಾಯMವBಸು ರುವ ಾಯMವBಸು ರುವ ಾಯMವBಸು ರುವ Aಾ Aಾ Aಾ Aಾ|| PÁæA ಕು ಕು ಕು ಕುªÀiÁgï 7ೆರವರು 7ೆರವರು 7ೆರವರು 7ೆರವರು ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಸ ಾರದ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಅನುಮ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ಇಲ:1ೆ ೇಮಕ'ೊಂಡು ೇಮಕ'ೊಂಡು ೇಮಕ'ೊಂಡು ೇಮಕ'ೊಂಡು ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆಂದು ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆಂದು ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆಂದು ಾಯMವBಸು 1ಾ&ೆಂದು ಔಷದ ಔಷದ ಔಷದ ಔಷದ MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು MಯಂತXಕರು ತಮc ತಮc ತಮc ತಮc ಪತX ಪತX ಪತX ಪತX ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ ಸಂ`ೆ,: ಔMಇ ಔMಇ ಔMಇ ಔMಇ/17/kೕಜೆ kೕಜೆ kೕಜೆ kೕಜೆ/2022-23, Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ Oಾಂಕ:24.06.2024ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ರ9: ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ. ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ1ಾCತ 1ಾCತ 1ಾCತ 1ಾCತ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ತlರ ತlರ ತlರ ತlರ ಪmF ಪmF ಪmF ಪmF ತSಾ ೆ ತSಾ ೆ ತSಾ ೆ ತSಾ ೆ, Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ೋಂ1ಾCಸಲEmFಲ:ದ ೋಂ1ಾCಸಲEmFಲ:ದ ೋಂ1ಾCಸಲEmFಲ:ದ ೋಂ1ಾCಸಲEmFಲ:ದ ವI ಗಳ ವI ಗಳ ವI ಗಳ ವI ಗಳ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಔಷಧ ಸರಬಾಜು ಸರಬಾಜು ಸರಬಾಜು ಸರಬಾಜು Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ Mವಹ@ೆ <ಾಡುವ6ದನು% <ಾಡುವ6ದನು% <ಾಡುವ6ದನು% <ಾಡುವ6ದನು% ತAೆಗಟುFವ6ದು ತAೆಗಟುFವ6ದು ತAೆಗಟುFವ6ದು ತAೆಗಟುFವ6ದು ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಾಯ=ಾ0ದು& ಾಯ=ಾ0ದು& ಾಯ=ಾ0ದು& ಾಯ=ಾ0ದು& ಇದನು% ಇದನು% ಇದನು% ಇದನು% MವBಸಲು MವBಸಲು MವBಸಲು MವBಸಲು ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಮಂಡ ಮಂಡ ಮಂಡ ಮಂಡ ಫಲ=ಾ0ರುತ 1ೆ ಫಲ=ಾ0ರುತ 1ೆ ಫಲ=ಾ0ರುತ 1ೆ ಫಲ=ಾ0ರುತ 1ೆ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ 26.10.2016, 23.05.2017, 19.06.2017 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 02.09.2022 ಈ ಈ ಈ ಈ Oಾಂಕಗಳ9: Oಾಂಕಗಳ9: Oಾಂಕಗಳ9: Oಾಂಕಗಳ9: ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು ಹಲ=ಾರು ಅ+ ಾಗಳನು% ಅ+ ಾಗಳನು% ಅ+ ಾಗಳನು% ಅ+ ಾಗಳನು% ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಪXIXp ಪXIXp ಪXIXp ಪXIXp ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ೈ'ೊಳdಲು ಚುಾವ@ಾ ಚುಾವ@ಾ ಚುಾವ@ಾ ಚುಾವ@ಾ ಅ+ ಾಗಳಾ%0 ಅ+ ಾಗಳಾ%0 ಅ+ ಾಗಳಾ%0 ಅ+ ಾಗಳಾ%0 ೇ-ದ&ರೂ ೇ-ದ&ರೂ ೇ-ದ&ರೂ ೇ-ದ&ರೂ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸಹ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಅ+ ಾಗ'ೆ ಅ+ ಾಗ'ೆ ಅ+ ಾಗ'ೆ ಅ+ ಾಗ'ೆ ಸಮಪಕ=ಾದ ಸಮಪಕ=ಾದ ಸಮಪಕ=ಾದ ಸಮಪಕ=ಾದ <ಾB <ಾB <ಾB <ಾB ಒದ0 ಒದ0 ಒದ0 ಒದ0 ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ನAೆಸುವ9: ನAೆಸುವ9: ನAೆಸುವ9: ನAೆಸುವ9: ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಈ0ರುವ ಈ0ರುವ ಈ0ರುವ ಈ0ರುವ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಸದಸ ಸದಸ ಸದಸ ಸದಸರು ರು ರು ರು ಸಂಪrಣ=ಾ0 ಸಂಪrಣ=ಾ0 ಸಂಪrಣ=ಾ0 ಸಂಪrಣ=ಾ0 ಫಲಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಫಲಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಫಲಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಫಲಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ. ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ ಸ ಾರವ6 ಸ ಾರವ6 ಸ ಾರವ6 ಸ ಾರವ6 ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆಯನು% ನAೆ ನAೆ ನAೆ ನAೆ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಆಡತ ಮಂಡಯನು% ಮಂಡಯನು% ಮಂಡಯನು% ಮಂಡಯನು% ರsಸಲು ರsಸಲು ರsಸಲು ರsಸಲು 7ಾಧ=ಾ0ರುವ6Oಲ: 7ಾಧ=ಾ0ರುವ6Oಲ: 7ಾಧ=ಾ0ರುವ6Oಲ: 7ಾಧ=ಾ0ರುವ6Oಲ:. ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಸದಸರುಗಳ ಸದಸರುಗಳ ಸದಸರುಗಳ ಸದಸರುಗಳ, ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ Mಯ<ಾವಗಳನ%ಯ Mಯ<ಾವಗಳನ%ಯ Mಯ<ಾವಗಳನ%ಯ Mಯ<ಾವಗಳನ%ಯ MಗOತ MಗOತ MಗOತ MಗOತ ಕತವ ಕತವ ಕತವ ಕತವ, ಮತು ಮತು ಮತು ಮತು ಜ=ಾ_ಾ& ಜ=ಾ_ಾ& ಜ=ಾ_ಾ& ಜ=ಾ_ಾ&ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಗಳನು% ಉತ ಮ=ಾ0 ಉತ ಮ=ಾ0 ಉತ ಮ=ಾ0 ಉತ ಮ=ಾ0 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ 2ಾಗೂ ವ@ಾಮ ಾSಾ0 ವ@ಾಮ ಾSಾ0 ವ@ಾಮ ಾSಾ0 ವ@ಾಮ ಾSಾ0 MವBಸುವ9: MವBಸುವ9: MವBಸುವ9: MವBಸುವ9: ಫಲಾ0ದು& ಫಲಾ0ದು& ಫಲಾ0ದು& ಫಲಾ0ದು& ಇವರ ಇವರ ಇವರ ಇವರ ಈ ಈ ಈ ಈ ನಡ*ೆCಂ1ಾ0 ನಡ*ೆCಂ1ಾ0 ನಡ*ೆCಂ1ಾ0 ನಡ*ೆCಂ1ಾ0 7ಾವಜMಕರ9: 7ಾವಜMಕರ9: 7ಾವಜMಕರ9: 7ಾವಜMಕರ9: ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ 7ೇ=ೆಗಳ 7ೇ=ೆಗಳ 7ೇ=ೆಗಳ 7ೇ=ೆಗಳ ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು 7ಾಕಷುF 7ಾಕಷುF 7ಾಕಷುF 7ಾಕಷುF ಅಸ<ಾ]ಾನ ಅಸ<ಾ]ಾನ ಅಸ<ಾ]ಾನ ಅಸ<ಾ]ಾನ 2ೊಂO 2ೊಂO 2ೊಂO 2ೊಂO, ಸಂ7ೆuಯ ಸಂ7ೆuಯ ಸಂ7ೆuಯ ಸಂ7ೆuಯ ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು ಕುತು 7ಾವಜMಕ 7ಾವಜMಕ 7ಾವಜMಕ 7ಾವಜMಕ ವಲಯದ9: ವಲಯದ9: ವಲಯದ9: ವಲಯದ9: ಅನು<ಾಾಸEದ ಅನು<ಾಾಸEದ ಅನು<ಾಾಸEದ ಅನು<ಾಾಸEದ vಾವನ vಾವನ vಾವನ vಾವನ ಮೂಡಲು ಮೂಡಲು ಮೂಡಲು ಮೂಡಲು ಾರwಭೂತಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಾರwಭೂತಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಾರwಭೂತಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ ಾರwಭೂತಾ0ರು*ಾ ೆ. ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ ಆದ&ಂದ, ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾp& ಾp& ಾp& ಾp& 1948 ರರರರ ಅ+Mಯಮ ಅ+Mಯಮ ಅ+Mಯಮ ಅ+Mಯಮ 19 ರರರರ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ 8ೕೆ'ೆ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ಸ ಾರOಂದ ರsಸ/ಾದ ರsಸ/ಾದ ರsಸ/ಾದ ರsಸ/ಾದ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ ಪಷ ನ DqÀ½vÀ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಮಂಡಯ ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ ಪXಸು ತ ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ೈ'ೊಳd ರುವ ೈ'ೊಳd ರುವ ೈ'ೊಳd ರುವ ೈ'ೊಳd ರುವ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಾಯಚಟುವm ೆಗಳನು% ಾಯಚಟುವm ೆಗಳನು% ಾಯಚಟುವm ೆಗಳನು% ಾಯಚಟುವm ೆಗಳನು% ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಮು0ಯುವವೆ'ೆ ಮು0ಯುವವೆ'ೆ ಮು0ಯುವವೆ'ೆ ಮು0ಯುವವೆ'ೆ ಸu0ತ'ೊ ಸu0ತ'ೊ ಸu0ತ'ೊ ಸu0ತ'ೊ, ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ ದೃzFCಂದ ದೃzFCಂದ ದೃzFCಂದ ದೃzFCಂದ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ಾಮ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ ವಷ ನ ಸುಗಮ ಸುಗಮ ಸುಗಮ ಸುಗಮ ಾ ಾ ಾ ಾಯMವಹ@ೆ'ಾ0 ಯMವಹ@ೆ'ಾ0 ಯMವಹ@ೆ'ಾ0 ಯMವಹ@ೆ'ಾ0 ವಷ 'ೆ ವಷ 'ೆ ವಷ 'ೆ ವಷ 'ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ನAೆ ನAೆ ನAೆ ನAೆ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ 2ೊಸ ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ಸದಸರು ೇಮಕ'ೊಳdವವೆ'ೆ ೇಮಕ'ೊಳdವವೆ'ೆ ೇಮಕ'ೊಳdವವೆ'ೆ ೇಮಕ'ೊಳdವವೆ'ೆ ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯನು% ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯನು% ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯನು% ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯನು% ೇ-ಸುವಂ*ೆ ೇ-ಸುವಂ*ೆ ೇ-ಸುವಂ*ೆ ೇ-ಸುವಂ*ೆ ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಸ ಾರ ೆR ಆಯುಕ ರು ಆಯುಕ ರು ಆಯುಕ ರು ಆಯುಕ ರು ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ವರOಯನು% ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ ಸ9:ರು*ಾ ೆ. 66 ಆಯುಕ ರು, ಆ2ಾರ ಸುರi*ೆ ಮತು ಔಷಧ ಆಡತ ಇವರ ಪX7ಾ ವೆಯನು% ಕೂಲಂಕುಷ=ಾ0 ಪWೕ9ದ ಸ ಾರವ6 ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡಂ*ೆ ಆ1ೇW1ೆ. ಸ ಾರದ ಆ1ೇಶ ಸಂ`ೆ: ಆಕುಕ 44 ಐಎಂಎಂ 2025 , ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 05.04.2025 , ಪ67ಾ ವೆಯ9: ವರುವ ಅಂಶಗಳ Bೆ%/ೆಯ9: ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಪಷ 'ೆ ಚುಾವ@ೆ ನAೆ 2ೊಸ ಆಡತ ಮಂಡಯನು% ಪ6ನ[ ರsಸುವವೆ'ೆ ಾಮ ಾp&, 1948 ರ ಅ+Mಯಮ 19 ರ 8ೕೆ'ೆ ಕಾಟಕ ಸ ಾರವ6 ರsಸ/ಾ0ದ& ವ6ಸು ತ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಮ ಪಷ ನ ಆಡತ ಮಂಡಯನು% ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ 2ಾಗೂ 7ಾವಜMಕ BತದೃzFCಂದ ತiಣOಂದ/ೇ {ಾ'ೆ ಬರುವಂ*ೆ ರದು&'ೊ ಆ1ೇW1ೆ. ಮುಂದುವೆದು, ಆಡ*ಾತcಕ 2ಾಗೂ 7ಾವಜMಕ BತದೃzFCಂದ ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜ ಾಮ ವಷ ನ ಸುಗಮ ಾಯMವಹ@ೆ'ಾ0 ಆಯುಕ ರು, ಆ2ಾರ ಸುರi*ೆ ಮತು ಔಷಧ ಆಡತ ಇವರನು% ಆಡ*ಾ+ ಾಯಾ%0 ತiಣOಂದ {ಾ'ೆ ಬರುವಂ*ೆ 2ಾಗೂ ಮುಂOನ ಆ1ೇಶದವೆ'ೆ ೇ- ಆ1ೇW1ೆ. ಕಾಟಕ ಾಜGಾಲರ ಆ|ಾನು7ಾರ ಮತು ಅವರ 2ೆಸನ9: Sd/- (WXೕಪ }. ೆ) ಸ ಾರದ ಅ+ೕನ ಾಯದW ಆೋಗ ಮತು ಕುಟುಂಬ ಕ/ಾಣ ಇ/ಾ`ೆ (vಾ=ೈವ ಮತು ಸಮನ~ಯ).” (Emphasis added) The aforesaid order was issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, appointing the Commissioner as the Administrator of the Council. The order also records the reasons which necessitated the dissolution of the Council. It reveals that, 67 the State Government had received several complaints alleging maladministration and financial mismanagement in the affairs of the Council. Pursuant to an investigation, a detailed report was submitted disclosing, that the Council had illegally invested its funds without obtaining the requisite approval of the Government. The report further records instances of abuse of power by the Registrar and the members of the Council. The order also notes that the Council had failed to comply with the statutory requirements relating to financial audits. It further records violation of Section 28 of the Act, inasmuch as the Council had failed to furnish to the State Government copies of the minutes of its meetings, the minutes of the Executive Committee, and abstracts of its accounts, as mandated under the Act. Therefore, the decision to dissolve the Council and appoint an Administrator was taken in public interest to restore transparency, accountability and proper administration in the functioning of the Council. 22. It is trite law that, decisions taken in public interest to ensure transparency, accountability and good governance prevail over the individual interests of members of elected or nominated 68 statutory bodies. Once the State Government, takes action to safeguard the proper administration of a public institution, the individual interest of its members in continuing in office must necessarily yield to the larger public interest. Therefore, having regard to the overwhelming public interest involved, the Government Order dated 05-04-2025 appointing an Administrator for the Council does not warrant interference at the hands of this Court and does not deserve to be set aside. 23. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER i. Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 is allowed in part. ii. The notification dated 03-10-2023, issued for election to the Council, stands sustained. iii. Mandamus issues, to respondent No.2 - Returning Officer to consider the representations dated 10-10-2023, 13-10-2023 and 21-10-2023, at Annexures - K, J and N of Writ Petition No.24000 of 2023 respectively, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 69 iv. Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025 is allowed. v. The notification dated 28-02-2025 at Annexure - B of Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025, issued for nomination of members to the Council, stands quashed. Consequently, the paper publication dated 01-03-2025 at Annexure - A of Writ Petition No.7473 of 2025, also stands quashed. vi. It is open to the respondent-State to issue a fresh notification for nominations in tune with law, bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order. vii. Writ Petition No.12522 of 2025 stands dismissed. Pending applications if any, also stand disposed as a consequence. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Bkp/CT:BR