^~^S E ^^^^^S 1??^ff^- ^s^?ff d^-®^s s ^ fl^ffflys^^1 ^^ ^ ^^s 3 ^ ?^ts^ ^. s^ ^^^ ^^ |IKH (jrjijKi (_t^ tJHMa.j HSiaAKH : BSU'l.Sfr'U" (C«N0. 29S8_W_zaQ7 1. Santo.sh Kumar Shukla, S/o Shri Prasad Shukla, 40 years, C/o Shail 1'uledica! Stores, Opp. Govl. Hospilai, Civli Line, Kawardha, in front of CMO Office, Kawardha, Distt. Kab'rdham (C(S). . 2. Raghuveer Singh Mutreja, S./o Shri Mahendra Singh Mu'treja, about 41 years, C./o Honey Medica! Stores, Chowk, Kawardha, Distt. 1 (GG). 3. Ranjeet Singh Saluja, S/o Arjun Singh Saluja, 56 years, C/Q iaiuja Medical Stores, Main Road, tewardha, Distt. tebirdham (CG). .Sa-'^ha^^^E 53^.ir»S..E 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Health and Famiiy *vVe!fare, D.K.S. Buiiding, \56iNUi ^5^" Chhattisaarh State Pharmacy Council, Quader No.TF, ?IU? i). »lt Naaar, Ralpur n'Vrit pet 3. Returning Officer, Chhattisgarh State Pharmacy CounciS, O/o Returning Ofncer, Chhattisgarh -State Pharmacy Councii, Quarter No.77, Sector 3, Geetanjaii Nagar, Raipur (CG). ition under.Artteie 226/227 ofthe Constitution of !rsdia} sle : Hon'bie Shrl K. Aanihotri, J. Awadh Tripathi, counsel for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Advocate Genera! fa te/respondent No.1. •v A.Govef'dhar!. counsel for resoor'derit Sh? ^ 3 .s!BS ?=^ s*s; ea", UKML ONUfcl on this 11'" day of -». By th.is petltion, the petitioners irnpugn the order 11-4-2007 (Annexure-P/1) whereby and whereunder the registration of the petitioners has been found doubtful, therefore, names of the petitioners were removed frorn the registration !ist and notification (Annexure-P/2) whereby election for eiecting six rnembers of Chhattisgarh Rajya Pharmacy Councll was notified. 2} !t Is informed, at the bar, that the etection had already taken piace and notincation of the constltutio" of the council has been issued on 12-6-2007. The copy of the said notification is taken on narorri 3) This Court wh'le consiclering the dispute involved Jn this peti 'n the matter of F'lanohar Jethani vs. -State of Chhatt«saari Others (W.P.No.2829 of 2005) observed as under: "2.....Under Section 36 of the Act. the Reaistrar is empowered with fhe power fo delete the name of a Pharmacist in register on one or other ground speclfied thereln. Therefore, S think Ihat enforcing the undertaking given to the Court i" Vv-P.No.1075/04 wouSd not result in any pubiic injury or mischtef. !n that view of the matter, 1 dispose of this writ petition directing the 2 respondent to register the name of the petitioner as Pharmadst under the Act without insistir'g 'that ..the petitioner shoujd "ii-in prescribed appiications under Sections 32 & 33 of the Act. However, it Is made ctear that 'f there are any grounds for the 2 respondent to proceed lalnst the petitioner in terrns of the Act, it is open Trom him So take correciive measures, In accordance with law...." 4) !n the tigh.t of the aforesaid observations, this petitiun stands disposed of with a d'rection to the concerned respondent authorities to cc-nsider the case of the petitioners under Section 36 of the Pharmacy A.ct, 1948 (for short "the Acf) without insisting that the petitioners shouid fsll-in prescribed form under Sections 32 & 33 ofthe tet, in accordance vyith iav</ and appropriate order as expeditiously as possible preferabiy wit'hin a period of four weeks frorn the ctate pf recelpt of a copy of this order. SsdiSS&.S^SSt t'^ aife s /y ^y' 5} With regard to second prayer seeki'ig ciuashrnent of notifi'sation (Annexure-P/2) is concerned, it is not necessary to adjudlcate on the ni'sttc^r as HB'W Blsctlon hsd 8lr8^dv tak9rs Diaco ^nd tne r@!l8f sou^ht fcsf 'has b©coni6tHfructuous, 6) Gonsequentiy, !.A.Nos.1 &2stand disposedpi--^ c,Al' ^<ijt\ c,^^ ^&e ^^