# RANJAN SINHA & ANR v. AJAY KUMAR.VISHWAK.ARMA & ORS

- **Citation:** [2017] 7 S.C.R. 194
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2017
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 8121 of 2004
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/ranjan-sinha-anr-v-ajay-kumar-vishwak-arma-ors-32048
- **Pages:** 34

## Headnote

A
B
c
D
[2017] 7 S.C.R. 194
RANJAN SINHA & ANR.
v.
AJAY KUMAR.VISHWAK.ARMA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8121 of 2004)
JULY03, 2017
'•.
(JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, CJI, N. V. RAMANA.AND.
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.) ..
Pharmacy Act, 1948:
Object of the Act - Role of pharmacist. - Discussed - Drugs
and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
'.
:...
..
ss.31, 32 - First Register prepared by erstwhile State of Bihar
is to be treated as tile First' Register for newly formed State of
Jharkhand and State of Bihar·..:.~The First Register as prepared by
the erstwhile State of Bihar is to h~ bifarcated based on the territor_ial
. nexus with the residential address as provided by the pharmacists
at the time of registration - The State of Jharkhand is at liberty to
· · t<?ke all necessary steps to constitute a· State Coum;il .:.. Those
pharmacists who are registered in the. First Register of the erstwhile
State of Bihar, before the enforcement of Education Regulation made
· E · by the Central Pharmaq Council, and who do not wish· to practice
in the State in which their residential address falls are at liberty to
register themselves in the other State in accordance with s.32(2) of
the Pharmacy Act - However, such of those pharmacists whose
names were registered in the First Register prepared by the erstwhile
F
State of Bihar, need to formally seek registration u/s.32(2) of the
Act in the State of Jharkhand and they need not satisfy the
qualification prescribed by the Education Regulation - Bihar
Reorganization Act of 2000 - ss.84, 85 - Constitution of India -
G
H
Art.3.
.
s.32 - Subseque!Jt register - Ajier the Education Regulations
came in force, only persons who possess qualification as prescribed
by the Education Regulations are entitled to be registered - Thus,
the qualifications as mentioned in s.31 would be relevant only till
preparation of First Register uls.30 - Bihar Reorganization Act,
2000.
194
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
19?
Bih01• Reorganization Act, 2000: .
A
ss.84, 85 - All the laws immediately in force before the
appointed date in the erstwhile Bihar shall be deemed to be
applicable to the territori~s of Jharkhand and the territories of
Bihar for the purpose of applicability of laws.
When a new State is formed by law made by Parliament,
whether the laws made by the existing State out of which a new
State is formed continue to apply to the territories included in the
new State - When the existing State territory is reorganized by the
Parliament there is no change in Sovereignty - It is only adjustment
B
of territories by transferring some territories in the existing State to
C
a newly formed State - Therefore, all the laws which were applicable·
to the territories of the re-organized State would continue to apply
to the territories transferred to the new State uritil the latter either
adapts or, subject to its competency amends or.repeals the existi_ng
and applicable laws.
·
. D·
Constitution of India..:. Art.3 - The principle of 'clean. slate'
as applicable in international law is not applicable when
reorganization takes place ·u/Art,3 of the Con.stitution ~ The
reorganized States do not usually start as tabula rasa, ·rather they
are successors of a pre-existing erstwhile States -
Bihar
Reorganization Act, 2000.
E
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. After the enactment of Drugs and Cosmetics Act,
1940 which prescribed the standard of quality of drugs sold. in
India, 'the importance of the role played by a pharmacist .was
realized. The Drug Rules, made under the Drugs and Cosmetics
Act, prescribed that the medicines which were compounded on
the prescription of medical practitioner can only be sold directly
F
by a pharmacist. In the absence of a qualified pharmacist, there
was a threat to the general health of people in India. Therefore
with a view to regulate the profession and practice of pharmacy, G
Pharmacy Bill of 1947 was introduced in the Parliament. It was .
referred to the Select Committee which made recommendations.
I

## Text

_Characters 0–39,102 of 80,823. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39102 for what follows._

A
B
c
D
[2017] 7 S.C.R. 194
RANJAN SINHA & ANR.
v.
AJAY KUMAR.VISHWAK.ARMA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8121 of 2004)
JULY03, 2017
'•.
(JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, CJI, N. V. RAMANA.AND.
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.) ..
Pharmacy Act, 1948:
Object of the Act - Role of pharmacist. - Discussed - Drugs
and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
'.
:...
..
ss.31, 32 - First Register prepared by erstwhile State of Bihar
is to be treated as tile First' Register for newly formed State of
Jharkhand and State of Bihar·..:.~The First Register as prepared by
the erstwhile State of Bihar is to h~ bifarcated based on the territor_ial
. nexus with the residential address as provided by the pharmacists
at the time of registration - The State of Jharkhand is at liberty to
· · t<?ke all necessary steps to constitute a· State Coum;il .:.. Those
pharmacists who are registered in the. First Register of the erstwhile
State of Bihar, before the enforcement of Education Regulation made
· E · by the Central Pharmaq Council, and who do not wish· to practice
in the State in which their residential address falls are at liberty to
register themselves in the other State in accordance with s.32(2) of
the Pharmacy Act - However, such of those pharmacists whose
names were registered in the First Register prepared by the erstwhile
F
State of Bihar, need to formally seek registration u/s.32(2) of the
Act in the State of Jharkhand and they need not satisfy the
qualification prescribed by the Education Regulation - Bihar
Reorganization Act of 2000 - ss.84, 85 - Constitution of India -
G
H
Art.3.
.
s.32 - Subseque!Jt register - Ajier the Education Regulations
came in force, only persons who possess qualification as prescribed
by the Education Regulations are entitled to be registered - Thus,
the qualifications as mentioned in s.31 would be relevant only till
preparation of First Register uls.30 - Bihar Reorganization Act,
2000.
194
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
19?
Bih01• Reorganization Act, 2000: .
A
ss.84, 85 - All the laws immediately in force before the
appointed date in the erstwhile Bihar shall be deemed to be
applicable to the territori~s of Jharkhand and the territories of
Bihar for the purpose of applicability of laws.
When a new State is formed by law made by Parliament,
whether the laws made by the existing State out of which a new
State is formed continue to apply to the territories included in the
new State - When the existing State territory is reorganized by the
Parliament there is no change in Sovereignty - It is only adjustment
B
of territories by transferring some territories in the existing State to
C
a newly formed State - Therefore, all the laws which were applicable·
to the territories of the re-organized State would continue to apply
to the territories transferred to the new State uritil the latter either
adapts or, subject to its competency amends or.repeals the existi_ng
and applicable laws.
·
. D·
Constitution of India..:. Art.3 - The principle of 'clean. slate'
as applicable in international law is not applicable when
reorganization takes place ·u/Art,3 of the Con.stitution ~ The
reorganized States do not usually start as tabula rasa, ·rather they
are successors of a pre-existing erstwhile States -
Bihar
Reorganization Act, 2000.
E
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. After the enactment of Drugs and Cosmetics Act,
1940 which prescribed the standard of quality of drugs sold. in
India, 'the importance of the role played by a pharmacist .was
realized. The Drug Rules, made under the Drugs and Cosmetics
Act, prescribed that the medicines which were compounded on
the prescription of medical practitioner can only be sold directly
F
by a pharmacist. In the absence of a qualified pharmacist, there
was a threat to the general health of people in India. Therefore
with a view to regulate the profession and practice of pharmacy, G
Pharmacy Bill of 1947 was introduced in the Parliament. It was .
referred to the Select Committee which made recommendations.
Incorporating the same, the bill was passed. The statement of
objects· and reasons makes it clear that only persons with
minimum standard of professional education should be permitted H
196
SUPREME COURT REPORTS .
[2017) 7 S.C.R.
A to practice the profession of pharmacy and for that purpose; it
was proposed to establish a Central Pharmacy Council with
powers to prescribe minimum standards of pharmacy education.
It was also proposed to establish provincial registers of qualified
Pharmacists. After the Act came into force, erstwhile Bihar
B constituted Registration Tribunal which duly prepared the First
Register of pharmacists and the State Government published the
same as per Section 30 (4) of the Act. [Paras 12, 13][208-G-H;
209-A-C]
2. When the Act was first enforced in the erstwhile Bihar,
there was neither a formal course in Pharmacy nor was there any
C Education Regulation made by the Central Council. Section 31
stipulated qualifications for pharmacists, as a temporary measure,
for preparation of First Register in the erstwhile Bihar. Section
32 of the Act prescribes qualifications for subsequent registration.
According to Section 32 (2), after the Education Regulations were
D brought in force, only those persons who possess qualification
prescribed by Education Regulations are eligible to be entered
in the register of the pharmacists.[Para 18](212-C-D]
3.1 After formation of Jharkhand with effect from
15.11.2000, by reason of Section 3 of the BROA, the territories
E
in the erstwhile Bihar were included in the Jharkhand. As a result
those included territories ceased to be. the territories of Bihar,
but, Section 84 and 85 of BROA saved all the e.nactments in force
immediately before 2000 and provided that the provisions of the
reorganization of the Bihar [Section 3 to 6 in Chap 2, BROA],
F
shall not be deemed to effect the change in territories to which
any law in force applied. Further it is provided that any territorial
reference in any law to the Bihar shall be construed, as meaning,
the territories within the existing territories of Bihar before the
appointed day. All the laws which are referred to in Section 84 of
the BROA would continue to have effect unless they are modified
G by way of repeal or amendment by the appropriate Government
i.e., Central or State Government, as the case may be. Further
the term 'law' is defined in Section 2 (f) of BROA includes any
enactment, ordinance, regulation, order, bye- law, rule, scheme,
notification or other instrument having, immediately before the
H
appointed day, the force of law in the whole or in any part of the
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
197
existing Bihar. Therefore, all the laws immediately in force before A
the appointed date in the erstwhile .Bihar shall be deemed to be
applicable to the territories of Jharkhand and the territories of
Bihar for the purpose of applicability of laws shall be deemed to
be part of territories of erstwhiie State of Bihar before the
appointed .date. [Paras 19, 20)(212-E-H; 213-A]
3.2 Sections 31 and 32 make it clear that the qualifications
prescribed for entering the name of the pharmacists in the First
Register is different from the qualifications prescribed for entering
B
the name of the pharmacist in the. subsequent register, after
coming into force of Education Regulations·. When the legislature
enacted the Act, there were hardly any pharmacy colleges offering
C
dedicated pharmacy course. Taking that into consideration,
Parliament prescribed qualifications under Section 31 for a limited
period till the framing of Education Regulations. Aftel'. the Act
came into force by reason of Sections 10 and 11, the Central
Council was empowered to make Education Regulations
D
prescribing minimum standards of Pharmacy education. Thus,
Sections 30 and 31 were intended to be effective and enforceable
only till such time the Central Council makes Education
Regulations. This is the reason why Section 32 starts with the
phrase 'after the date appointed under sub section (2) of section '30
and before. education regulations have taken effect in the State. • In
E
· such a case a person shall be entitled to have his. name entered
in the register if he carries on the profession of the pharmacy in
the State and he satisfy the conditions prescribed by the State.
As per sub-section (2) of Section 32, after enactment of the
Education Regulations, a person shall be entitled to have his
name entered in the register only if he possesses the qualifications
as prescribed by Education Regulations. Thus, the qualifications
as mentioned in Section 31 would be relevant only till such time
of preparation of Ffrst Register under Section 30.[Para 21)(213B-E]
3.3 The question however, remains as to whether the First
Register prepared by the erstwhile Bihar shall be deemed to be
the First Register of the newly formed State of Jharkhand. The
Act came to force in India, including erstwhile Bihar, in the year ·
1948. As per Section 29 (1), every State .as soon as Chapter IV
F
G
H
198
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
A has taken effect, the State shall prepare a register of pharmacists
by inference, such register is the First Register. Section 31
prescribes qualifications for those who would be entered into First
Register. For the purpose of registration in the First Register,
State Government shall constitute a Registration Tribunal and
B
the First Register so prepared shall be published. The First
Register prepared and published shall be a permanent register
· in relation to all pharmacists, in the State of Bihar. The same shall
be given custody to the State Council constituted under the
Section 19. A reading .of sub-section (4) and (5) of Section 30
would show that an authority appointed by the State Government
C:
to hear appeals in relations to First Register, shall decide the
question of entering a new name in the register or amending the
same. Such facility is available after the date appointed under
Sub section (2) of Section 30 and before the enforcement of
Education Regulations made by the Pharmacy Council of India.
D
[Paras 22, 23)(213-F-G; 214-A-C]
·
4. There is no doubt that as directed by the State
Government, the First Register for the erstwhile Bihar was duly
· published· after following the procedure contemplated under
Section .. 30 of the Act. Article 3 of the Constitution inter alia;
empowers the Parliament by law to form a new State by separatioli" ·
·· ·
E of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States.Article· .
4 is.to the effect thatthe law made by the Parliament with reference
·to Article 3 may contain supplemental, consequential and
incidental provisions. When the existing State territory is
reorganized by the Parliament there is no change in Sovereignty'.
. F It is only adjustment of territories by transferring some territorie.s
in the existing State to a newly formed State. Therefore, all the
laws which were applicable to the territories of the re-organized
State would continue to apply to the territories transferred to the.
new State until the latter either adapts or, subject to its
· competency amend5 or. repeals the existing and applicable laws.
G. Whenever a law was made under the Articles 2, 3 and 4 of the
H
.. Cor~stitution of India, re-organizing the State, the Parliament
included provisions to explicitly spell out such position. States
Re-organizations Act of 1956, Bombay Re-organization Act of
1960, The Punjab Re-organization Act of 1966, Madhya Pradesh
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
199
.
Re-organization Act of 2000, Uttar Pradesh Re-organization Act A
of 2000 and Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act of 2014
contained provision which laid down that the laws in existing State
would apply to all the territories transferred to form a new State.
[Paras 24-26)(214-C-D, E-H; 215-A; 216-A-BJ
5. Section 84 of BROA contains two legal fictions, first is
B
that the reorganization of the Bihar would not affect the
applicability of laws made by the State of Bihar to all territories
included in it before reorganization and after the re-organization.
In other words, a law made 'by Bihar shall be applicable to all the
territories of erstwhile State of Bihar including the territories of C
State of Jharkhand even after reorganization. The second fiction
is that until Jharkhand provides for it by way of amendment or
otherwise, territorial reference in any law to the Bihar shall me.an
: all the territories in the Bihar before reorganization; For instance,
ifBihar had made a law as applicable to entire Bihar, it shall apply
to the Bihar and Jharkhand until it is amended by the new State. D
The terr•tories to which the said Act is made applicable would
also include the territories which were included in the Jharkhand.
Section 85 is an enabling provision which empowers both the
States to make adaptations and modification of the .. law by way of
amendment to the law as the appiicable to newly formed State. •
.. [Para· 29)(218-A-CJ
E
6. The Ffrst RegiSter · p~blished .in Bihar hefore
reorganization would be deemed to be the First Register of llewly
formed Jharkhand to the extent it contains those pharmacists
who were .natives of the territories that were transferred to
Jharkhand. When a State as for~ing part of Indian nation is reorganized, in law in so far as application of laws is. concerned, the
· following three things would happen namely; (i) the existing State
(Parent State) which made various laws, would continue to exist;
(ii) the new State so formed by transferring some territories will
F
be deemed to be the territories of the parent State. for the purpose . G
of applicability of the laws; and (iii) those laws made by parent
State shall continue to apply to new State until they are modified
or amended by a competent. legislature in relation to new State
and the 'law' as defined in the definition Clause would be the law
which was in force in the existing State which would be enforceable
H
200
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
A in the newly formed State. [Paras 34, 35] [223-A-C)
7.1 Under Article 3 of the Constitution, the Parliament can
alter, amend, amalgamate,. form new States, diminish or increase
area of a State. The principle of 'clean slate' as applicable in
international law is not applicable when reorganization takes place
B under Article 3 of the Constitution. The reorganized States do
not usually start as tabula rasa, rather they are successors of a
pre-existing erstwhile States, Under the BROA, the Jharkhand
was carved out of the B~har and the two separate states came
into existence on 15.11.2000. If the laws in force were to lapse
on the day the division was effected, a chaotic situation would
C have emerged inasmuch as the newly created State would be
rendered a State without laws. To avoid such situation, provisions
like Sections 84 and 85 of BROA have been enacted to maintain
continuity, and at the same time authorizing the States to make
such modifications and adaptations as are considered necessary
D by mere issuance of orders within two years, and thereafter by
legislation. 'Law' includes 'other instruments having the force of
law'. In view of use of the word 'includes', the definition of 'law'
under Section 2(f) shall be interpreted exhaustively. The First
Register prepared by the Bihar has the force of law under Section
E 2(f) of the BROA. [Paras 36, 37) [223-D-H]
F
7.2 In view of that when the First Register of Pharmacists
prepared by the Registration Tribunal was published by the
Government of Bihar under subsection (4) of Section 30, the same
is conclusive and any amendments by way of inclusions can be
carried out till the framing of the Education Regulations by the
Pharmacy Council of India. For doing this the competent authority
may take into consideration the qualifications as prescribed by
Section 31 of the Act. However, after the coming into force of the
Education Regulations as well as at the time of subsequent
Registration, Government has to necessarily adhere to the
G Education Regulations. Any person who does not satisfy the
qualifications as per the Education Regulations shall not be
entitled to seek entry in the Pharmacy register. In that view of
the matter, when the State of Bihar is precluded from preparing
the First Register again, then the State of Jharkhand is1equ!llly
not entitled in law to prepare the First Register again. The High
H
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VTSHWAKARMA
201
court of Jharkhand therefore came to correct conclusion in this A
regard. The High Court did not consider the effect of Section 84
of BROA fully with reference to First Register, though it came to
the conclusion that there was no need for preparing the First
Register all over again. The First Register for the State of
Jharkhand is the register already prepared for the undivided B
Bihar including all the pharmacists who may now be residing in
the State of Jharkhand. In so far as BROA is concerned, though
the Act was adopted under Sections 84 and 85 of BROA, no such
amendment has been made. In that view of matter applying
section 84, First Register prepared by the erstwhile Bihar will
be deemed and continues to be the First Register for the
Jharkhand. This does not however prohibit the Jharkhand to take
up subsequent registration as per Sections 32 and 32A and 328.
In such an event concerned authority of Jharkhand has to follow
c
the Education Regulations as amended from time to time by the
Pharmacy Council of India. Section 86 of BROA, explicitly D
empowers this Court to construe the law in a manner to effectively
implement Sections 84 and 85. In light of having considered all
the provisions of BROA, all pharmacists in the First Register of
pharmacist for the former State of Bihar, whose residential
address, as shown therein, fall in the territory of State of
Jharkhand, shall be construed to be part of First Register of E
Jharkhand. Future inclusion of additional names in the Register
is to be made strictly in terms of Section 32(2) of the Pharmacy
Act. State of Jharkhand will take all necessary steps to constitute
a State council in near future, if not already undertaken.
Consequently the High Court order to the extent of quashing
the notification of State Government of Jharkhand, dated
12.11.2001, constituting the Registration Tribunal in terms of
Section 30 and advertisement calling for applications in terms of
Section 31 is upheld. [Paras 38, 39, 41 and 42)[224-A-E; 225-GH; 226-A-C]
State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh (1976) 3 SCC 242
: [19761 2 SCR 115; Sher Singh v. Financial
Commissioner of Planning, Punjab (1987) 2 SCC 439
: [19871 2 SCR 691; Dayanand v. Union of India (1996)
7 SCC 47 : [19951 3 Suppl. SCR 533; Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes, Ranchi v. Swarna Rekha Cokes and
F
G
H
202
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
A
Coals (Pvt.) Ltd. (2004) 6 SCC 689 : [2004) 2 Suppl.
B
SCR 633 - relied on.
Case Law Reference
[1976] 2.SCR 115
[1987) 2 SCR 691
[1995] 3 Suppl. SCR 533
relied on
relied·on
relied on
Para 30
Para 31
Para 32
[2004) 2 Suppl. SCR 633
i:elied on
Para 33
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8121
of 2004.
C
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.06.2003 of the High Court
of Jharkhand at Ranchi in W. P. (PIL) No. 1429 of2002.
Maninder Singh,ASG, A. Mariarputham,AjitKr. Sinha, Sr. Advs.,
·Ms. Aruna Mathur, Yusuf Khan, Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha
Arputham (For Mis: Arputham, Arona & Co.), Ms. Bina G~pta, Prabhas
Bajaj, Rohit Rathi, Akshay Amritanshu, Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, A. P. ·
D
Mayee, Kumar Parimal, A. Selvin Raja, Mishra Saurabh, Anldt Kr. Lal,·
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, C.D. Singh, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Varinder Kumar
Sharma, Mohd. Shahid Hussain, Ashok Mathur, B. K. Satija, Advs. for
the appearing parties.
E
F
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
N. V. RAMAN A, J. 1 ~This case revolves round the complexities
faced by the State of Jharkhand [hereinafter 'Jharkhand' for brevity]·
and applicability of laws, framed by the erstwhile State of Bihar
[hereinafter 'Bihar'for brevity], to the newly bifurcated State by means
ofBihar Reorganization Act, of2000 (Act No. xxx 0(2000) [hereinafter
'BROA 'for breviry]. In this Civil Appeal we are called upon .to determine
the scope of Sections 30, 31and32 ofPharmacyAct, 1948 [hereinafter
'Act' for breviry] and it's applicability to the new State after 15.11.2000.
The examination of the questions which fall for our consideration, as
indicated hereafter, would also involve consideration of various provisions
G of BROA, which we propose to do after noticing the brief factual
background.
H
2. The Act came into force in.India including the undivided Bihar
in 1948. In the State ofBihar, State Pharmacy Council, underthe Chapter
III was established on 07 .02.1955 and consequently First Register of
pharmacists, under Section 30 of the Act, was duly prepared. In the
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
203
[N. V. RAMANA, J.]
meanwhile, the Education Regulations framed by Pharmacy Council of A
India under Section I 0 of the Act came into force with effect from
07 .02.1958. It may be mentioned th.at after Education Regulations came
. into force, only such persons with qualifications as per those regulations
can be entered in the Register of Pharmacists.
3. After the bifurcation, Jharkhand constituted Registration Tribunal
B
under Section 30 of the Act on 12.11.2001. The said Tribunal published
the following notification on I 4.01.2002 inviting applications for registration
of pharmacists in the State of Jharkhand.
HINDUSTAN
Published from Ranchi,
C
Patna, Delhi and Lucknow
RANcm, MONDAY 14 TH JANUARY 2002.
GQVERNMENT OF· JHARKHAND
. ·HEALTH, MEDICAL. EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE. DEPARTMENT·
(MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH)
D
PRESS NOTIFICATION
As per notification No. 40(i) of the Health, Medical Education and Family
Welfare Department dated 10.01.2002 all persons having qualification
under Section 31 of the Pharmacy Act 1948 may apply forregistration
and the last date for making such applications fixed as 25.02.2002.
E
The prescribed fee fo.r registration are described as under:
1. Registration fee
Application form fee
. Inscenti ve fee
Registration fee
2. Renewal fee
Incentive fee
Renewal fee
3. No objection certificate fee
4. Duplicate Certificate fee
5. La~e fee
:Rs. 25/-
:Rs. 25/- .
:Rs. 200/-
:Rs. 25/-
:Rs.l 00/-
. : Rs.100/-
. : Rs. 275/-
: Rs. 25 per year
F
G
H
204
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
A
The application forms can be obtained on any working day from the
office of Pharmacy Institute, Ranchi, Registrar, Pharmacy Registration
Tribunal, Bariyat, Ranchi on prescribed fee and the completed form along
with the bank draft can be·deposited at the same place.
Sd/- (Prakash Kumar)
B
Dy. Secretary to Govt.
P.R. 2278 (Health 100)
2001-2002
(emphasis supplied)
4. It is clear from the press notification that all the persons who
c have qualification under Section 31 of the Act were qualified to apply
for registration as pharmacists. Being aggrieved, three diploma holders
in pharmacy from the recognized institutions and registered as
pharmacists filed Writ Petition being W.P. No. 1429 of2002, praying for
writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the press notification dated
14.01.2002 and for a writ in the nature of mandamus to Registration
D
Tribunal, Ranchi, the Respondent No. 6 herein, to register only such
persons, as pharmacists, who have requisite qualifications in terms of
the Education Regulations, 1991 i.e., having qualification of diploma or
degree of duly recognized by Pharmacy Council of India or State Councils.
The Petitioners before the High Court mainly contended that when the
E
First Register under Section 30 of the Act was prepared by the erstwhile
Bihar, there is no question of preparing First Register again by Jharkhand
and that any subsequent registration or preparation of register will be in
accordance with Section 32 in which event only those persons who fulfill
the qualification as per the Education Regulations would be entitled to
F
be registered as pharmacists.
5. Before the High Court, Jharkhand took a plea that on formation
of the new State it acquired a right to prepare First Register in terms of
Section 30 and that in furtherance thereof a Registration Tribunal was
constituted to register all those who possess qualifications in terms of
Section 31. The State Pharmacy Council also took a similar plea. It is a
G
matter of record that out of 10950 applications received pursuant to
14.01.2002 notification, a large number of them i.e., 8940 persons did
not have the degree or diploma in pharmacy. But all of them sought
registration relying on Section 31( d) of the Act.
6. A division bench of the High Court of Jharkhand on elaborate
H
RANJAN SINHX & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
205
[N. V. RAMANA, J.]
consideration of applicable provisions of the Act and BROA came to the
A
conclusion that Education Regtilations, applicable to the erstwhile Bihar,
are law for the new State of Jharkhand in terms of Sections 84 and 85 of
the BROA and therefore unless a person is qualified as per Education
Regulations, cannot get himself registered. It was observed as underWhat is contended on behalf of the Petitioners is that the Pharmacy
B
Act was extended to the State ofBihar had notified and adopted
the Education Regulations issued under Section 10 of the Act
which was in Part II of the Act, that both the Act and the.Education
Regulations hence constitute law for the purpose of the State of
Jharkhand carved out of the modification of either the Education
Regulations or the Pharmacy Act by the competent Legislature,
namely, the Parliament, that no such attempt was also made by
the State of Legislature and in the Jharkhand and unless a person
was qualified in terms of the Education Regulations, he could riot
get his name entered in the Register. We find considerable force
c
in this submission. It is true that the Jharkhand was carved out D
with effect from 15.11.2000. By virtue of Section 84 of the Bihar
Reorganization Act, the Pharmacy Act and the Education
Regulations applied. In the absence of any modification, alternation
or repeal of either the Act or the Education Regulations by the
competent Legislature, it could not be postulated that the law had
ceased to be in force merely on the formation of the State of E
Jharkhand. Section 84 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, in our
view, is clear. Moreover, it is not possible for the Court to ·
contemplate a law less State as it were. If the argument of the
Respondents were to be accepted, the position would be that there
was no law relating to Pharmacy or regarding qualifications for
getting recognition as a Pharmacist in the State of Jharkhand and
F
it is yet to be made. In other words, until the same is made there
will be a vacuum. Such an argument, u~less compelled, can not
be acceptable. The territories now forming the State of Jharkhand
originally formed part of the State ofBihar, were governed by the
Act and the Education regulations promulgated and adopted in
G
terms of Section 85 of the Bihar Reorganization Act. This scheme
of the Reorganization Act is consistent with the general principle
that a law once made applicable to a territory will continue to
apply to that territory unless its application is abrogated or dispensed
H
206
A
B
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
with by the competent Legislature or authority or its replacement
by any other law enacted in that behalf. Therefore, it is clear that
.Education Regulations promulgated under Section 10 and adopted
in terms of Section 11 of the Act to the territory .in question,
continues to apply. There is also the· stand adopted by the Indian
pharmacy Council in its additional counter affidavit. We find the
said stand sustainable in law.
7. In dealing with the question whether Jharkhand is entitled to ·
prepare the First Register again, the High Court observed that it is
skeptical on the need for preparing the First Register in terms of Section
C
30 of the Act and went on to say. ·
D
E
F
G
H
There was already a First Register for the State ofBihar including
the.territories forming the State of Jharkhand in terms of Section
3ofthe State ofBihar Reorganization Act. Those who are included
in the First Register and who are practicing their profession within
. the territories newly forming the Jharkhand, would continue to
have the right to practice their profession in the newly created
State of Jharkhand. The first register for Stat\: of Jharkhand would
be of those persons who are already in the register prepared for
the undivided State of Bihar based on their territorial loyalty or
the situs of their practice. There will therefore be no need for
preparing the First register all over again as urged by the counsel
for the State of Bihar and the tribunal constituted under Section
13 of the Act. The First register for the State of Jharkhand is the
register already prepared for the undivided Bihar including all those
who are now of State of Jharkhand or are practicing their
profession in the territories of the State of Jharkhand. What would
arise would only be the inclusion of further names of qualified
persons, if they possess the requisite qualification under the
Education regulations and in terms of Section 32 (2) of the
Pharmacy Act. The argument, that on the formation of a State,
the State is obliged to prepare a First register in terms of Section
30 of he Act with reference to Section 31 of the Act cannot,
therefore, be accepted.
8. Aggrieved by the Order of the High Court, appellants herein
appealed by way of special leave to this Court.
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
207
[N. V. RAMANA, J.]
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
A
9. In light of these background facts and contentions raised by the
appellants, following two points would arise for consideration1. Whether the First Register prepared by the State ofBihar shall
be deemed to be the First Register of the State of Jharkhand in
view of Section 84 and 85 of the Bihar Reorganization Act of B
2000?
2. Whether persons whci do not possess any qualification as
prescribed by the Education Regulations are entitled to be
registered by the State of Jharkhand?
SUBMISSIONS
I 0. Before this Court, Learned Senior Counsel Shri A.
Mariarputham, for appellant has mainly contended thatc
a. On reading the provisions of the Act, it is clear that there is a
mandatory requirement to have register under Section 29 by
D
every State/State Government and the State Council is duty
bound to maintain the register as required under Section 29.
b. The Hon'ble High Court has erred in failing to appreciate that
every State has to have a First Register of the pharmacists on
its own as mandated in Section 30 and 31 of the Act which is
an express provision. If the interpretation given by the Hon'ble
High Court is agreed, then Section 29, 30 and 31 will become
redundant and meaningless.
c. In any case the Education Regulation which is a subordinate
legislation cannot prevail over the express provisions of the
Act. The High Court erred in laying down to procedure which
is not in consonance with the express provisions of the Act.
11. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Ajit Kumar Sinha, for State of
Jharkhand contends thata. Section 30 requires First Register to be prepared by the State
Government by constituting a Registration Tribunal.
b. In the erstwhile State ofBihar, there was a Register in existence,
does not take away the obligation of the State of Jharkhand to
prepare the First Register.
E
F
G
c. The fact that territories comprised in the State of Jharkhand
H
208
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017] 7 S.C.R.
A
were earlier part of Bihar, does not detract from the fact that
Jharkhand is a separate and independent State, and that it is a
new State, or affect its rights and obligations under Section 30.
d. The obligation to prepare the first register and the right to do so
by the new State of Jharkhand is clear and protected by Section
B
30.
e. A view that it is not desirable to include in the First Register, all
the persons mentioned in Section 31 of the Act as eligible to be
included in the first register, cannot be a factor or consideration
in interpreting Section 30. Section 30 has to be interpreted on
c
its own terms and since the language is clear, has to be given
effect to, as it is.
t: In any event, a subordinate legislation like Education Regulations,
cannot be invoked to interpret Section 30 or whittle down rights,
obligations and entitlements under Section 30. Sections 30
D
and 31 together are a complete code for preparing the First
Register. In this context, Education Regulations cannot be
factored in for the purposes ofinterpretation, which is relevant
only for Section 32 i.e. subsequent inclusions in the Register.
g. There is nothing' in Sections 84 and 85 of the Bihar
E
Reorganisation Act which militate against Sections 30 and 31
of the Pharmacy Act. They are general provisions to deal
with the administration of the State, in the context of the new
State of Jharkhand coming into existence, whereas Sections
30 and 31 of the Pharmacy Act are special provisions and in
the field specified/occupied by the Pharmacy Act, they would
F
prevail and operate .
. POINT No.1AND2
12. We propose to deal with both the points together. It appears
that after the enactment of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 which
G
prescribed the standard of quality of drugs sold in India, the importance
of the role played by a pharmacist was realized. The Drug Rules, made
under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, prescribed that the medicines which
were compounded on the prescription of medical practitioner can only
be.sold directly by a pharmacist. In the absence of a qualified pharmacist,
there was a threat to the general health of people in India. Therefore
H
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
209
[N. V. RAMANA, J.]
with a view to regulate the profession and practice of pharmacy, · A
Pharmacy Bill of 194 7 was introduced in the Parliament. It was referred
to the Select Committee which made recommendations. Incorporating
the same, the bill was passed. The statement of objects and reasons
makes it clear that only persons with minimum standard of professional
education should be permitted to practice the profession of pharmacy
and for that purpose; it was proposed to establish a Central Pharmacy
Council with powers t-0 prescribe minimum standards of pharmacy
education. It was also proposed to establish provincial registers of qualified
Pharmacists.
B
13. After the Act came into force, erstwhile Bihar constituted
Registration Tribunal which duly prepared the First Register of C
pharmacists and the State Government published the same as per Section
30 (4) of the Act.
14. The Chapter l of the Act contains- short title, extent and
commencement of the Act and definitions. It would be pertinent to note
that Section l (3) states that Act will come into force at once, but Chapters
TU, IV, V shall take effect in a particular State from such date as the
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint in
this behalf. Further proviso to the said Section states that where on
account of the territorial changes brought about by the reorganization of
States on the I" day ofNovember, 1956, Chapters III, IV and V shall
take effect in the remaining part of that State from such date as the
State Government may in like manner appoint. 1 Although it was argued
that the bifurcation of Jharkhand took effect after 1956 therefore, the
proyiso to sub-section (3) of Section 1 is squarely applicable to Jharkhand,
such arguments are clearly erroneous as it is apparent from the plain
reading of the proviso itself. The application of the proviso was a onetime
measure which was only applicable to the State.s Re-organization of
States in 1956 as on 1'
1 of November, 1956 anq the application of this
proviso cannot be extended beyond 01.11.1956 by way of interpretation
ofBROA.
.
15. At this stage, it wquld be apt to refer,to tWo definitions relevant
for resolution of the dispute in this case. As per Section2 (h) "register"
means a register of pharmacists prepared and maintain1;.d under Chapter
IVi. The term register connotes that both First Register as well as
1 This proviso was introduced by Act 24of1959.see. 2 (w.e.f. 1-5-1960)
2 This definition was introduced by Act 70 of 1976, sec. 2, for clai!ses (h), (i) and (j)
(w.e.f. 1-9-1976)
n
E
F
G
H
210
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2017) 7 S.( .!\
subsequent register. Further, as per Section 2 (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.
16. The Chapter IP of the Act contains the framework for the
Pharmacy Council of India and its functions. Under Section 10 of the
Act, the Pharmacy Council of India is empowered to make Education
Regulations prescribing the minimum standard of education required to
be qualified as a pharmacist.4 In accordance therewith the Pharmacy
Council notified the Education Regulations in the year 1953 which was
subsequently replaced by the Education Regulations, 1972. These
Regulations were repealed and replaced by the Education Regulations,
1981. As of now the Education Regulations, 1991 (repealing Education
Regulations, 1981) are in force which were notified on 11.07.1992. It is
to be noted that these Education Regulations have been in force now for
past 50 years and have been implemented in all parts of the country
uniformly. Section 11 of the Act provides for enforcement of the Education
Regulations framed under Section 10 of the Act.
17. The Chapter N of the Act, inter alia, provides for qualification,
registration, renewal and removal of pharmacists from the register. Under
Section 29 thereof it shall be the duty of the State Govemment to cause
to be prepared a register of pharmacists for the State. Section 30 deals
with the constitution ofa Registration Tribunal consisting ofthree members
entrusted with the powers of preparing the First Register. Section 31
prescribes qualification for registration in the First Register. These two
provisions are extracted below30. Preparation of first register-( I) For the purpose of preparing
the first register, the State Govemment shall by notification in the
Official Gazette constitute a Registration Tribunal consisting of
three persons, and shall also appoint a Registrar who shall act as
Secretary of the Registration Tribunal.
(2) The State Govemment shall, by the same or a like notification,
appoint a date on or before which applications for registration,
'Contains Sections 3 to 18 of the Act
4 JO. Education Regulations.-(!) Subject to the provisions of this section, the Central
Council may, subject to the approval of the Central Government, make regulations, to
be called the Education Regulations, prescribing the minimum standard of education
required for qualification as a pharmacist
RANJAN SINHA & ANR. v. AJAY KUMAR VISHWAKARMA
[N. V.