Authority: High Court of Judicature at Bombay

Order Date: 8 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Janhavi Vinod Shegonkar (Writ Petition No. 7978 of 2026).
  • Respondents: State of Maharashtra & others (Respondent Nos. 1‑3) and Respondent No. 4 – Paras Skill Development Institute, Akola.
  • Relief Sought: Direction to Respondent No. 2 to issue hall tickets and conduct demo, practical and final examinations on 1‑2 July 2026 for the Certificate Course in Health Sanitary Inspector.
  • Background Facts:
  • Admission advertised for Academic Year 2025‑2026; 161 students applied, of which only 60 seats were sanctioned by Respondent No. 2.
  • Institute admitted 101 excess students, including the petitioner, based on a list uploaded on Respondent No. 2’s web portal.
  • Respondent No. 2 issued a letter on 13 September 2024 directing Respondent No. 3 to stop accepting new institutions, courses, or additional intake.
  • Institute sought additional intake on 10 July 2025, 27 Oct 2025, 10 Nov 2025, and 14 Nov 2025; Respondent No. 3 sought clarification from Respondent No. 2 on 18 July 2025.
  • Respondent No. 3 rejected the additional intake on 4 December 2025 and reiterated rejection on 8 April 2026.
  • On 17 December 2025, Respondent No. 3 warned Institute of penalty under the Maharashtra Unauthorized Institutions and Unauthorized Courses of Study Act, 2013 for admitting excess students.
  • Students wrote to Respondent No. 3 on 17 June 2026 requesting permission to appear for examinations.
  • A competent authority hearing on 19 June 2026 resulted in an order on 25 June 2026 holding the 101 excess admissions unauthorized, refusing examination permission, directing refund of fees, imposing penalty on Institute, and requiring an undertaking.
  • Institute filed an appeal against the 25 June 2026 order; the appeal is pending with no stay granted.
  • Counsel Submissions:
  • Petitioner's counsel (Sariputta Sarnath) argued that students had paid fees and were under legitimate expectation of admission.
  • Respondent No. 2’s counsel (A.I. Patel) contended that the portal list does not constitute admission; only 60 seats were sanctioned and admitted.
  • Institute’s counsel (Krishnakant Dhere) highlighted infrastructure adequacy, prior approvals for other institutions, and pending appeal.
  • Court Findings:
  • Documents show Respondent No. 2 sanctioned only 60 seats; Institute admitted 60 students accordingly.
  • The claim that 161 students (including 101 excess) were accepted by Respondent No. 2 is misleading.
  • Petition was filed with unclean hands due to false statements.
  • Institute admitted excess students despite clear rejection and penalty notice, violating the 2013 Act.
  • Prior approvals for other institutions do not justify the present violation.

Final Outcome

  • The writ petition is dismissed.
  • Respondent No. 4 – Paras Skill Development Institute is ordered to pay Rs 50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as costs to the High Court Staff Welfare Fund, payable within two weeks of order upload.
  • The June 25 2026 order rejecting the excess admissions and imposing penalty remains effective; Institute’s appeal does not stay the order.

Topics: Legal Dispute, Education Regulation