Home  |  News  |  Sitemap  |  Contact Us  |  Login
Advertise With Us
Latest Notification
  • banner1
  • banner2
  • banner3
  • banner4
  • banner5
  • banner6
  • banner7
banner11 banner22 banner33 banner44 banner45 banner46 banner47

 Case Digest


Back
Pharmacy Act, 1948
Section 36 — cancellation of registration — appeal against
Section 36 — cancellation of registration — appeal against
- the appellant did not produce any evidence as to how his registration in Sikkim was a valid registration —if the registration of the concerned pharmacist obtained from another state does not appear to be a justified registration, the transferee State Council can certainly decline to accept that registration for the purpose of carrying on the profession of a pharmacist in the transferee State, or cancel such registration once effected — the appellant did not reside or carry the business or profession of pharmacy or dispensing of drugs in Sikkim for more than five years. Also, the first respondent did not have any opportunity to examine as to whether the appellant did have the experience of five years in Rajasthan — the Supreme Court found no error in the decision of the first respondent in cancelling registration of the appellant — appeal dismissed — no costs.
Rajendra Prasad Bagaria Appellant(s) vs. Pharmacy Council of State of Rajasthan & Another Respondent(s), Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No(s). 6895 of 2008, D/d 6.2.2012
Section 36 — cancellation of registration — appeal against
- the appellant did not produce any evidence as to how his registration in Sikkim was a valid registration —if the registration of the concerned pharmacist obtained from another state does not appear to be a justified registration, the transferee State Council can certainly decline to accept that registration for the purpose of carrying on the profession of a pharmacist in the transferee State, or cancel such registration once effected — the appellant did not reside or carry the business or profession of pharmacy or dispensing of drugs in Sikkim for more than five years. Also, the first respondent did not have any opportunity to examine as to whether the appellant did have the experience of five years in Rajasthan — the Supreme Court found no error in the decision of the first respondent in cancelling registration of the appellant — appeal dismissed — no costs.
Rajendra Prasad Bagaria Appellant(s) versus Pharmacy Council of State of Rajasthan & Another Respondent(s), Supreme Court of India

Back


» Home
» Latest Notification
» New Drugs
» Import of Drugs
» Drug Prices
» Legislations
» Applications Forms
» Quackwatch
» Forms & Fees
» Licence Conditions
» Schedules
» Health, Pharma. Policies & Reports
» Ayurvedic
» Govt. Bodies
» Information Centre
» Directory
» Alert
» Regulatory News
» Research News
» News in Hindi
» Login
» Contact Us

Copyright © DrugsControl.org - Jaipur, INDIA. All Rights Reserved   |   Disclaimer   |   Sitemap

Site last updated: December 30, 1899 at