Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKA
Shree Swami Samarth Bahuuddeshiya Shaikshanik Samajik Sanstha va Krida Mandal, Osmanabad (Dharashiv), Through its Administrative Officer & Campus Director Shri. Anandkumar Nandkumar Khadke – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Higher & Technical Education Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. approval process for diploma in pharmacy. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. allegations of arbitrary rejection without proper consideration. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. strict adherence to supreme court timelines in approvals. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 4. obligation of authority to consider compliance reports. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 5. reconsideration of proposal for the next academic year only. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties the petition is heard finally at the admission stage itself.
2. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the decision dated 18.09.2025 passed by respondent no. 4 – Pharmacy Council of India, whereby the proposal of the petitioners for grant of approval to commence a new Diploma in Pharmacy (D. Pharm) course for the academic year 2025–2026 has been rejected. The petitioners seek quashing of the said decision and a direction to respondent No. 4 to grant approval for the said course and to include the name of petitioner No. 2 in the list of approved institutions for the purposes of the centralized admission process for the academic year 2025–2026.
3. Petitioner N
The rejection of an academic approval proposal without consideration of compliance and opportunity for hearing violates natural justice principles; adherence to regulatory timelines is mandatory.
The main legal point established is the requirement for reasoned orders, fair consideration, and specific communication of deficiencies by the PCI, highlighting the illegality of non-speaking decisio....
The court underscored the importance of adhering to established admission timelines for professional courses, rejecting claims of arbitrary actions by regulatory authorities in the absence of timely ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the specific validity and requirements of approval and consent letters for affiliation, emphasizing the need for compliance with these requirements....
DME is the Examining Authority of D.Pharm course - NOC from the Government is essential to start D.Pharm course.
The court emphasized that denial of renewal of educational permission without providing an inspection report and opportunity to rectify deficiencies violates principles of natural justice.
Mandatory documents for approval of educational courses must be submitted as specified by regulatory authorities to ensure compliance with statutory requirements.
The court emphasized that regulations permit consideration of a new course application within extended deadlines, establishing procedural fairness for institutions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
