Bombay High Court

ALLAMA MOHD TAHER EDUCATIONAL AND CAREER FOUNDATION BEED THR ITS SECRETARY FAROOQUIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition was dismissed as misconceived because the proposed location's exclusion from the perspective plan precludes permission.

Summary

The petitioner, Allama Mohd. Taher Educational and Career (AMTEC) Foundation, filed a writ petition challenging a communication dated 17 November 2025 which informed it that the location Neknur, intended for a junior college, was not included in the 2024-29 perspective plan, thereby precluding consideration of its proposal. The petitioner sought permission to establish the junior college despite this exclusion. The Court examined whether the exclusion from the perspective plan barred the petitioner from obtaining the required permission. It held that the petition was misconceived because the statutory framework requires inclusion in the perspective plan before permission can be granted. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court directing the petitioner that it may reapply if Neknur is included in the subsequent 2029-34 perspective plan.

Issues considered

Whether a petitioner can obtain permission to start a junior college when the proposed location is not included in the current perspective plan.

Subjects

Education
Junior College
Perspective Plan
Writ Petition
Administrative Law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39429-DB
                                                                                 82-WP-10729-26.odt



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 10729 OF 2026

      Allama Mohd. Taher Educational and
      Career (AMTEC) Foundation, Beed                          ..PETITIONER
             VERSUS
      State of Maharashtra and Another                         ..RESPONDENTS

                                              ....
      Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for Petitioner
      Mr. V.M. Kagne, A.G.P. for Respondent no.1 - State
                                              ....

                                        CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                                ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                        DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2026

      PER COURT :

      1.         By this petition, the petitioner challenges the communication dated 17 th

      November, 2025 by which the petitioner was informed that Neknur, where the

      petitioner intends to start a junior college, is not in the perspective plan of 2024-29.

      Therefore, his proposal cannot be considered.


      2.         If this is so, we cannot entertain prayer of the petitioner to grant

      permission to his college on the basis of non-inclusion of Neknur in the perspective

      plan of 2024-29. Writ petition being misconceived, stands dismissed.


      3.         The petitioner is at liberty to apply if Neknur is included in the

      perspective plan of 2029-34.



            ( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. )            ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )
      SSD


                                          1 / 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…