Allama Mohd. Taher Educational And Career (Amtec )Foundation Through Its Secretary v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Other
2025:BHC-AUG:23031-DB 10-WP.3258.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3258 OF 2024 Allama Mohd. Taher Educational & Career (Amtee) Foundation, Rajuri Ves, Beed, through its Secretary - Dr. Farooqui Kafil Ahmed, Age: 47 years, Occ. Business, r/o. Rajuri Ves, Beed, ..Petitioner Vs.
1.
The State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Dept., Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032 2.
S.N.D.T. Women's University, Through its. Registrar, 1, Nathibai Thackersy Road, New Marine Line, Churchgate, Mumbai - 400 020 ..Respondents ---- Mr.S.S.Thombre, Advocate for petitioner Mrs.P.J.Bharad, AGP for respondent no.1 ----
CORAM
:
R.G.AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
DATE :
AUGUST 07, 2025 ORDER :- Heard.
2.
This petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:- (B) By issuing a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature, the respondent authorities may kindly be Dated 17/12/23 directed to consider the proposal of the petitioner for granting
10-WP.3258.2024 college to the petitioner institution of Bachelor of Fashion Design course at Beed for the academic year 2024-2025 and for that purpose issue necessary orders;
(C) By issuing appropriate writ order or directions in the like nature, the impugned letter / order dated 14.12.2023 issued by the respondent no.2 may kindly be quashed and set aside thereby directing to the respondent no.2, grant permission (LOI) to the petitioner institution to run and open the Bachelor of Fashion Design Course at Beed for that purpose issue necessary orders. 3.
The petitioner is an educational institute. It has preferred an application for permission to run a college for Bachelor of Fashion Design course, at Beed, for the academic year 2024-2025. It has been informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the University has recommended the proposal. The same has not been decided in spite of the academic year to have passed by. 4.
The petitioner would be content with if direction is issued to respondent no.1 to consider the petitioner's proposal on its own merits and decide the same in any case on or before commencement of the next academic year.
5.
Hence, the following order:- (i) Respondent no.1 shall consider the petitioner's proposal on its own merits and decide the same, in any case, on or before commencement of the next academic year, to be specific on or before 30.11.2025.
10-WP.3258.2024 (ii) The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [R.G. AVACHAT, J.] KBP