Bombay High Court

SHARDA BHAVAN EDUCATION SOCIETY THR ITS JOINT SECRETARY RAOSAHEB K SHENDARKAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court directed Respondent No. 6 to decide on the petitioners' applications for affiliation within two weeks of receipt of the order.

Summary

Sharda Bhavan Education Society challenged a government order that barred the introduction or expansion of pharmacy courses for the 2026-27 academic year. The society had applied to the Pharmacy Council of India for B.Pharm, D.Pharm and M.Pharm programmes; B.Pharm and M.Pharm were approved but the D.Pharm application was rejected for lacking the mandatory consent of affiliation from the examining authority. The society subsequently sought this consent from the affiliating authority (Respondent No. 6) through multiple representations, but received no response. The High Court, after hearing all parties, directed Respondent No. 6 to decide on the pending applications within two weeks and kept all parties' contentions open, allowing the petitioners to approach the Apex Court if consent is eventually granted.

Issues considered

Whether the affiliating authority (Respondent No. 6) is obligated to respond to the petitioners' representations for consent of affiliation for the D.Pharm course.
Whether the court can issue a mandatory direction to the affiliating authority to decide within a specified time.

Subjects

pharmacy education
affiliation consent
writ petition
government order
Pharmacy Council of India
admission process

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:44289-DB


                                               {1}                     WP-12896-2026

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               WRIT PETITION NO. 12896 OF 2026

              Shri. Sharda Bhavan Education Society
              Through its Joint Secretary
              Shri. Dr. Raosaheb s/o Krishnaji Shendarkar & Another      ...Petitioners

                   Versus

              The State of Maharashtra & Others                       ...Respondents

              Mr. S.S Rathi, Advocate for the Petitioners
              Mr. Sanjeev B. Deshpande, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Chaitanya
              Deshpande i/b Adv. S.S. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
              Mrs. Saie Joshi, AGP for State
              Mr. S.G. Karlekar, Advocate for Respondent No. 4
              Mr. Santosh Jadhavar, Advocate for Respondent No. 6
                                                .......

                                   CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                               ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.


                                      DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.   Not on board. Upon mentioning the matter is taken on board.


              2.   Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 25.05.2026 issued

              by Respondent No. 3 whereby the Government has decided not to

              allow courses of pharmacy to be introduced by the institutions or

              increase in the capacity of pharmacy courses should not be permitted

              for the academic year 2026-27.
                                     {2}                        WP-12896-2026

3.       Petitioners applied for B.Pharm, D.Pharm and M.Pharm courses

to Respondent No. 2/Pharmacy Council of India. Though, petitioners

was permitted to run B. Pharm and M. Pharm courses, permission is

rejected so far as D. Pharm course is concerned, on the ground that,

petitioners have failed to submit consent of affiliation of examining

authority for D.Pharm course for 2026-27 academic session which is a

mandatory document for consideration of the application.


4.       After the said rejection, petitioners have approached Respondent

No.   6     seeking   consent   of   affiliation   by   representations   dated

20.04.2026, 21.05.2026, 02.07.2026, however, till date, there is no

response from Respondent No. 6.


5.       Having heard learned advocate for the petitioners, learned Senior

Advocate for Respondent No. 2, learned Advocate for Respondent No.

4, learned advocate for respondent No. 6, learned AGP for State and in

the peculiar facts of the present case, we deem it appropriate to

dispose of the writ petition by directing Respondent No. 6 to take

decision on the above applications/representations of the petitioners

within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this

order.


6.       All the contentions of respective parties are kept open.
                                    {3}                      WP-12896-2026

7.       In case, Petitioners receive consent of affiliation from Respondent

No. 6, petitioners are at liberty to approach the Apex Court for seeking

permission to participate in the ongoing admission process.



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




Bhagyawant Punde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…