UG/PG Higher Degrees But Appointment Criteria Can't Be Tinkered: Patna HC Upholds Bihar Pharmacists Cadre Rules Mandating Diploma In Pharmacy

The Patna High Court has upheld the constitutional and statutory validity of Rule 6(1) of Bihar Pharmacists Cadre Rules, 2014 (amended), making Diploma in Pharmacy (D. Pharma) from Institutions recognized by the Government along with a certificate, a compulsory requirement to be eligible for appointment as Pharmacist in State Health Department.

Dismissing a series of writ petitions, the Court observed that while graduate and post-graduate degrees in Pharmacy are higher qualification but when the minimum qualification of Diploma in Pharmacy has been fixed in the cadre rules, it cannot be tinkered with only on the ground of it not being sound or wise. The court thus held that criteria was neither arbitrary nor beyond the scope of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 or the Pharmacy Practice Regulations, 2015.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Partha Sarthy in its order observed: 

"The Government, in its wisdom, has found that course curriculum of Diploma in Pharmacy is different from what it is for graduate degrees. The experience has shown that diplomates are better suited for health services. Could this be questioned by the Courts? As has rightly been pointed out by the learned Advocate General, the very fact that diplomates have no other avenue of appointments and that they have undergone the intensive training in hospital-care, are some of the indices on which the rules are is said to have been made. There is no exclusion of graduate degree holders provided they possess the basic qualification of Diploma in Pharmacy.Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the impugned cadre rules has saddled graduates/post-graduates in Pharmacy to any disproportionate harm. It has also been decided on several occasions that B. Pharma and M. Pharma are not in the same channel of education as that of diplomates, notwithstanding the fact that the diplomates can take lateral entry in B. Pharma course in its second year".

The court further observed, "No doubt, graduate and post-graduate degrees in Pharmacy are higher qualification but when the essential/minimum qualification of Diploma in Pharmacy has been fixed in the cadre rules, it cannot be tinkered with only on the ground of the same not being wise or sound or as suggested, arbitrary. The prescriptions of course study for Pharmacist under the Pharmacy Act of 1948 and the Regulations of 2015, referred to above, are only with respect to the eligibility of such graduates, postgraduates and diplomates to practice Pharmacy, subject to their registration with the respective Pharmacy Councils of States but that does not pertain to the matters of recruitment, which are in the exclusive domain of the appropriate Governments". 

The petitioners, including several qualified B. Pharma and M. Pharma holders registered with the Bihar State Pharmacy Council, as well as the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), approached the Court challenging Rule 6(1) of the Bihar Pharmacists Cadre Rules, 2014. The impugned rule specified that only such applicants who had passed all sections of the course of Diploma in Pharmacy from a government-approved educational institution were eligible to be appointed as Pharmacists with the State Health Department.

The petitioners argued that this condition was not harmonious with the Pharmacy Practice Regulations, 2015, drafted by the PCI under Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948, which recognizes both Diploma and Bachelor degrees as valid qualifications to practice as a Pharmacist. They also argued that the rule was arbitrary, irrational, and violated Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, to the extent that it deprived better-qualified individuals of employment in government service.

One of the petitions was filed by the PCI directly, asserting its exclusive jurisdiction over the regulation of pharmacist qualifications in India and that the Bihar Rules were inconsistent with the central act and the subordinate regulations.

Rejecting the challenge, the High Court clarified that the power to prescribe eligibility criteria for public recruitment lies with the appropriate government, not the PCI. While PCI can set academic standards and professional benchmarks, the cadre rules are a function of executive policy.

The Court found that there was no constitutional violation, nor was there any irrationality in requiring even B. Pharma or M. Pharma holders to possess a Diploma in Pharmacy to be eligible. It ruled that the rule simply fixed a minimum threshold, and allowing higher degree holders to participate, only if they also met that threshold, did not amount to exclusion or discrimination.

Responding directly to the action of the PCI in trying to override the State's recruitment criteria, the Court remarked, “We have found the request made to the Bihar Technical Service Commission by the Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) to be totally unwarranted.”

"Thus, finding that the fixation of minimum qualification for recruitment of Pharmacist and the “note” in the cadre rules providing that holders of higher degree could apply but subject to their having obtained the minimum qualification of diploma is neither arbitrary or exclusionary per se...For the afore-noted reasons all the petitions fail. All the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly," the court added. 

Case Title: Sanjeev Kumar Mishra vs The State of Bihar

LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 29

Click Here To Read Judgement