Bombay High Court

MADHUKAR NIVRUTTI AHER AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. THE SEC. HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND ORS

Decided: 2 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court allowed the petitioners to pursue the appeal and disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating the merits.

Summary

The petitioners, Madhukar Nivrutti Aher and others, filed a writ petition seeking permission to pursue an appeal they had already lodged before respondent No.5. Respondents Nos.6 to 8 opposed, contending that the appeal lacked merit and was not maintainable. The High Court examined the procedural request and, without expressing any view on the substantive merits, held that the petitioners' request to continue the appeal was reasonable. The Court directed that respondents Nos.6 to 8 could still appear before the appellate authority and raise any objections, including on maintainability. It further instructed the appellate authority to decide the pending appeal expeditiously, within ninety days of 08/09/2026, and disposed of the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioners may be permitted to pursue the appeal filed before respondent No.5
Whether the appeal is maintainable in view of the objections raised by respondents Nos.6 to 8
Procedural direction to the appellate authority regarding time limits for deciding the appeal

Subjects

writ petition
appeal maintainability
procedural direction
High Court of Bombay
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AS:36022-DB


                Bhogale                                                 20.wp-13064-2024.odt



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 WRIT PETITION NO.13064 OF 2024

               Madhukar Nivrutti Aher and ors.             … Petitioners
                    Versus
               The State of Maharashtra and ors.           .… Respondents

                                             ****
               Adv. Vaibhav Kulkarni a/w Adv. Prathamesh Deshpande, for the
               petitioners.
               Ms. Rupali M. Shinde, AGP for the respondent-State.
               Adv. Anu C. Kaladharan h/f Adv. Anjali N. Helekar, for respondent
               No.4-AICTE.
               Adv. Gunjan Shah i/b. Adv. Sandeep Waghmare, for respondent
               Nos.6 to 8.

                                                ****
                                               CORAM :     M. S. KARNIK &
                                                           SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

                                                 DATE :    2nd SEPTEMBER 2026

               P.C. :


               1.          Heard learned counsel for the parties.

               2.          The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since

               an appeal has been filed by the petitioners before the respondent

               No.5, under instructions he wishes to pursue the appeal before

               respondent No.5.



                                                1
 Bhogale                                                 20.wp-13064-2024.odt



3.         The request is opposed by the learned counsel for

respondent     Nos.6 to 8.   According to the learned counsel for

respondent Nos.6 to 8 all necessary documents, affidavits and

other subsequent events, would reveal that there is no merit in this

writ petition. Further, it is submitted that the appeal itself is not

maintainable.

4.         Considering that the petitioners have filed an appeal

before the respondent No.5, we find the request of the petitioners

to pursue the appeal reasonable. It is always open for the

respondent Nos.6 to 8 to appear in the pending appeal and raise

all available objections on merits, including that of the

maintainability of the appeal. Respondent Nos.6 to 8 would

obviously have the liberty to produce and rely upon the necessary

documents,      subsequent   events   as   well   as   the    pleadings

which according to respondent Nos.6 to 8 support their case.

5.         It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion

on the merits of the contentions. Though the Circular dated

26/09/2022 says that the appeal should be decided within thirty

days, we request the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal as


                               2
                              Bhogale                                               20.wp-13064-2024.odt



                           expeditiously as possible in terms of the Circular and in any case

                           within a period of ninety days from 08/09/2026 on which date the

                           petitioners as well as respondent Nos.6 to 8 shall appear before the

                           Appellate Authority at 11:00 a.m.

                           6.           Needless to mention the parties can obviously rely on the

                           decisions rendered by the Courts, which shall be duly considered

                           by the Appellate Authority.

                           7.           Keeping all contentions open to be raised before the

                           Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of.




                           (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                             (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 02/09/2026 17:24:40                                    3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…