Students have to pay more and faculty get less in pharmacy colleges as they suffer the dual control of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and Pharmacy Council of India (PCI). The dual control, though, is in blatant violation of court orders and recommendations of a high-level committee, set up by the Centre. Pharmacy colleges seek the approval of both AICTE and PCI, paying huge inspection and affiliation fees and bear the burden of repeated inspections, conducted at different times by the two agencies. PCI recently started framing syllabus for degree and postgraduate courses without consulting AICTE, violating court orders. PCI framed the syllabus and regulations for B Pharm, M Pharm and Pharm.D and directed universities to adopt them. Many universities rejected them but some obeyed. So far, universities used to frame syllabus, finalize regulations and evaluate students based on appropriate systems of examination, as per the recommendations of the board of studies, faculty, and academic council. It is alleged that PCI does not have expertise and certain private college teachers are entrusted with the work of framing the syllabus.
But AICTE is also to blame for letting PCI gain control. B Pharm colleges used to take PCI approval by the time students were in the final year. It was during those days that AICTE made its approval compulsory for D Pharm institutions. AICTE did not object to steps taken by PCI and PCI did not object to steps taken by AICTE. It was a win-win situation for both. All pharmacy colleges, both in government and private, started applying for the approval and affiliation from both agencies every year by paying fees. Even government institutions, exempted from the AICTE inspection fee, started paying inspection fee to PCI for approval. Dual control became a source for collecting money for working funds. The AICTE Central Council is under the direct and immediate MHRD control. Its chairman, vice-chairman, member secretary and other officers in power are all appointed by the Government.
AICTE is funded by MHRD to the tune of Rs 4,000 to Rs 5,000 crore annually. Funds are used for various academic and research activities in technical courses including pharmacy. AICTE gives a lot of support and assistance to government institutions, public universities and accredited institutions, including private/ self-finance colleges. They don’t collect inspection/ approval fee from Government/ public institutions. No other council, including medical, dental, nursing or pharmacy gets such grants or funds from the Centre. A look at the constitution of MCI, Nursing Council and Dental Council will show that all their members are professors or principals of educational colleges. The country is now ripe for modernizing the pharmacy practice on par with international standards. The good news is that the recently introduced banning of fixed dose combinations (FDCs), Goods and Service Tax ( GST) system, generic prescription and dispensing of medicines, and the 2017 drug policy of government of India are all expected to make serious changes in the pharmacy sector in the country.
Law for AICTE control in higher education
Pharmacy education at the university-level was introduced at Benares Hindu University in 1932 by Prof M.L.Schroff. There were only four pharmacy degree colleges at the time of Independence. AICTE was formed in 1945 and PCI in March 1948, based on the Pharmacy Act 1948. Right from 1945, pharmacy education at university- level was with AICTE. PCI looked after diploma in pharmacy (D Pharm), which was conducted by government departments like Director of Technical Education, Director of Medical Education or in some cases by the Drugs Control Department. AICTE Act was passed by Parliament in 1987.
The preamble to the Pharmacy Act says the law was enacted to “regulate the profession of pharmacy and practice of pharmacy and for that purpose constitute the pharmacy councils”. But AICTE Act says, “An Act to provide for the establishment of an AICTE with a view to proper planning and coordinated development of the technical education system throughout the country, the promotion of qualitative improvement of such education in relation to planned quantitative growth and regulation and proper maintenance of norms and standards in the technical education system and for matters connected therewith”.
As per the Act, the All India Board of Pharmaceutical Education was also constituted in AICTE. The Central council of AICTE has a representative of PCI as its member. Up to 2000 AD, PCI focused on D Pharm course only and AICTE governed pharmacy courses at the university-level. D Pharm colleges outnumbered pharmacy degree colleges. Between 2000- 2006 the number of pharmacy college increased drastically and all on a sudden PCI stepped in, facilitating the inspection and approval process, charging fees. In the landmark case of ‘A. Mahesh Vs K.K. College of pharmacy’, the High Court of Madras on April 10, 2002 ordered: “Pharmacy Act is a statute enacted prior to the Constitution.
The AICTE Act covers the same field earlier covered by the Pharmacy Act, particularly laying down norms and standards for studies in the field of pharmacy... the AICTE Act to the extent it covers the same field as covered by the Pharmacy Act will prevail and the provisions of the Pharmacy Act to that extent would yield to the AICTE Act...Consequently provisions of AICTE Act alone shall regulate and control colleges in the matter of laying down norms and standards for courses in pharmacy”. Provisions of Section 10 to 15 of the Pharmacy Act shall be deemed to be inoperative in so far they relate to the admission of students, syllabi, course of study and the examination and for that matter the approval of pharmacy course. Consequently provisions of AICTE Act alone shall regulate and control colleges in laying down norms and standards for courses in pharmacy”.
However the court upheld the role of PCI in regulating the profession of pharmacy and its practice and observed that PCI can take effective steps in that direction. In 2014 October, the Government decided to strengthen the AICTE and constituted the AICTE Review Committee under the chairmanship of M.K. Kaw, former secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, to make recommendations for restructuring and strengthening the technical education in the country. Kaw Committee submitted its report in April 2015. Among other things the committee studied the issue of dual control by AICTE and PCI.
Chapter 31 of the Report says: “AICTE would be the regulator for all technical institutions, including in subject areas where professional councils exist. As discussed in the report, AICTE will mentor, support and advise these institutions”. AICTE jurisdiction is supreme. Any provision in the Pharmacy Act that runs counter to Section 2(f) of AICTE Act shall stand repealed. It also says “all matters of dispute or disagreement between AICTE and Pharmacy Council of India shall be referred to the board of studies for pharmacy in the AICTE, where the PCI is also represented...In important cases, the matter may be taken to the Executive Committee or the Council of the AICTE for a final view”.
(The author is chairman, Pharmaceutical Society of Kerala)
