Supreme Court rules that Pharmacy Act prevails over AICTE Act in matters of Pharmacy education [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court recently held that in the matters of Pharmacy education, including with respect to intake of pharmacy students, the Pharmacy Act, 1948 would assume primacy. (The Pharmacy Council of India v Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts Vidarbha Institute of Pharmacy and Ors. Etc.).A Bench of Justices Arun Mishra, Vineet Saran and MR Shah held that,.“The norms and regulations set by the PCI and other specified authorities under the Pharmacy Act would have to be followed by the concerned institutions imparting education for degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy, including the norms and regulations with respect to increase and/or decrease in intake capacity of the students and the decisions of the PCI shall only be followed by the institutions imparting degrees and diplomas in Pharmacy.”Supreme Court.The Court, however, added that the present decision would not affect students already admitted in the increased intake capacity pursuant to interim orders. The Bench has directed Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) to give consequential benefit of registration to such students..The Court was dealing with a row over restrictions imposed by the Pharmaceutical Council of India (PCI) on the intake of students to various Pharmaceutical courses. .Student intake was increased after the Colleges obtained permission and approval from the All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE). However, the AICTE had increased the intake capacity, despite the PCI not approving the same. .Various High Courts ruled that the AICTE is the supreme authority between the two bodies, namely, AICTE and PCI and the decision of AICTE will prevail over the decision of PCI..The present appeal was filed before the Supreme Court against these High Court’s orders..In this backdrop, the issue before the Supreme Court was regarding which Act would prevail, i.e. the Pharmacy Act, 1948 or the AICTE Act, in matters concerning Pharmacy eduction - including approval of courses of study, minimum standards of education required for qualification as a Pharmacist, registration as a Pharmacist, regulation of future professional conduct etc..In other words, the question was,"which body, i.e. AICTE or PCI would primarily be responsible for regulation of pharmaceutical regulation in India.".The Supreme Court first noted that the Pharmacy Act was a special law, and further that the legislative intent in enacting the Act was to ensure that there was “seamless regulation of the profession”..On the other hand, the “AICTE Act can be said to be a general law applicable to the technical institutions and technical education", the Court said. .To decide on the conflict between the two, the Court proceeded to rely on the various case, wherein it was noted that special laws impliedly repeal earlier general laws. Citing once such case, LIC of India v. DJ Bahadur, the judgment records,.“The general rule, that prior statutes are held to be repealed by implication by subsequent statutes if the two are repugnant, is said not to apply if the prior enactment is special and the subsequent enactment is general….”.In view of this position, the Supreme Court proceeded to rule, ."... the Pharmacy Act is a Special Act in the field of pharmacy and it is a complete code in itself in the field of pharmacy, the Pharmacy Act shall prevail over the AICTE Act which, as observed hereinabove, is a general statute dealing with technical education/institutions."Supreme Court.The Court also opined that since PCI consisted of experts in the field of pharmacy, it was in the larger interest that the PCI was given the power to regulate in the field of pharmacy. As stated in the judgment, ."The fight of supremacy between both the regulators is unhealthy for the education sector as well as the institutions to permit two regulators to function in the same field. Therefore also and more particularly when the PCI is consisting of the experts in the field of pharmacy and other related subjects, it is in the larger interest in the field of pharmacy that the PCI must be given the power to regulate in the field of pharmacy.".Hence, the Court concluded that, "in the field of Pharmacy Education and more particularly so far as the recognition of degrees and diplomas of Pharmacy Education is concerned, the Pharmacy Act, 1948 shall prevail.".Before parting with the matter, the Court also directed those institutions who were unable to get the PCI's approval to increase the intake of pharmaceutical students to apply afresh if they wanted to increase the intake,.[Read the Judgment here]