Pharmacists register and state reorganisation: existing first register continues, while later entries must meet Education Regulations.

Section 84 of the Bihar Reorganization Act preserved the statutory force of laws and territorial references in the parent State, so the First Register prepared under the Pharmacy Act for Bihar continued to operate for the territories forming Jharkhand and no fresh First Register was required. After the Education Regulations came into force under the Pharmacy Act, subsequent entries in the pharmacists register had to satisfy those regulations under Section 32(2); the temporary qualifications for preparation of the First Register could not govern later registrations. Persons lacking the prescribed educational qualifications were therefore not entitled to be entered in the register for subsequent registration.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the First Register prepared by the erstwhile State of Bihar continued to operate as the First Register for the newly formed State of Jharkhand; (ii) whether persons lacking the qualifications prescribed by the Education Regulations could be entered in the pharmacists register in Jharkhand.

Issue (i): whether the First Register prepared by the erstwhile State of Bihar continued to operate as the First Register for the newly formed State of Jharkhand.

Analysis: Section 84 of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 preserved the force of laws in existence immediately before the appointed day and provided that territorial references to Bihar would be construed with reference to the territories of the existing State before reorganisation. Section 85 empowered adaptation of such laws, but no amendment was shown displacing the existing register. The First Register already prepared under Section 30 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 had statutory force and continued to attach to the territories that became Jharkhand. A new First Register was therefore not required to be prepared merely because the State was bifurcated.

Conclusion: the First Register prepared by Bihar continued as the First Register for Jharkhand.

Issue (ii): whether persons lacking the qualifications prescribed by the Education Regulations could be entered in the pharmacists register in Jharkhand.

Analysis: Sections 30 and 31 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 governed preparation of the First Register only for the limited transitional stage before the Education Regulations took effect. Once the Education Regulations framed under Section 10 and enforced under Section 11 were in force, subsequent registration was controlled by Section 32(2), and entry in the register could be made only by persons satisfying those regulations. The temporary qualifications in Section 31 could not override the later and operative educational standards for subsequent entries.

Conclusion: persons not possessing the qualifications prescribed by the Education Regulations were not entitled to be entered in the register for subsequent registration.

Final Conclusion: the existing Bihar First Register was preserved for Jharkhand, while future registration had to conform to the Education Regulations and the State could not create a fresh First Register.

Ratio Decidendi: On State reorganisation, laws and statutory registers in force in the parent State continue to operate in the successor State by virtue of the saving provisions, and transitional qualifications for a first register cannot govern subsequent registration once the Education Regulations have come into force.

---