Association of Self Finance Educational Institutions and Another vs State of U.P. and Others

Heard Mr. Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Faizal Ahmed Khan, learned Counsel for the petitioners alongwith the learned Counsels appearing in the respective writ petitions for the petitioners and Mr. Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General alongwith learned Chief Standing Counsel alongwith the learned Counsels of the respective Universities.

Though the petitioners have challenged the Government Order on various counts but keeping in view the urgency of the matter, we entertain the writ petition only for the limited purpose i.e. determination of fees charging from the students of B.Ed. Courses for the academic session 2008-09.

The U.P. Private Professional Educational Institution (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006 (here-in-after referred to as the ''Act'') provides the provision for determination of fees by Committee appointed by the State Government.

The petitioners being aggrieved with the provision of Section 6 of the Act, which provides the allocation of seats as well as Section 10 regarding constitution of Committee filed writ petition bearing No. 4408 (M/B) of 2006. This Court being satisfied with the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioners, stayed the operation of Section 6 as well as Section 10 of the Act. However, subsequently, by means of another order passed on 5.12.2008 in writ petition No. 7905 (M/B) of 2008, this Court pleased to modify and vacate some portion of the interim order, which stayed the operation and implementation of the provision of Section 10(1) of the Act and allowed the Committee to determine the fee of the Self Financed Professional Colleges within the shortest possible period, keeping in mind that the students may pay the fee before the close of the session.

Learned Counsels for the petitioners submit that the State Government has not followed the order passed by this Court as it has not constituted the Committee as per the provisions of the Act, therefore, at some point of time, the petitioners also challenged the constitution of Committee, which is under consideration of this Court.

According to the learned Additional Advocate General since the court did not interfere in the functioning of the Committee, the Committee proceeded to determine the fee and called upon the Colleges through the University to appear and submit their stands by providing them ample opportunity of hearing. In response, except two colleges, none turned up. Therefore, the Committee could not take final decision and occasion arose for the State Government to determine the fee and accordingly, the State Government issued the orders impugned.

We are informed that in the meantime, counseling took place and the students took admission by paying the annual fees somewhere Rs. 50,000/- and somewhere Rs. 56,000/-, but in the light of the Order issued by the Government, some of the students approached the local authorities for refunding their balance fees, pursuant to which the local authorities tried to interfere in the functioning of the college administration and accordingly they started torturing and harassing the petitioners, which is still continuing, on account of which the petitioners are not in a position to run the colleges peacefully. Thus, the determination of fee in question is still before this Court, but since this Court has allowed the Committee to determine the fees, we feel it appropriate to provide that let the Committee proceed to determine the fees after providing opportunity of hearing to the colleges in consideration of several factors as provided u/s 10 of the Act and finalise the same, which shall be subject to the decision of this Court. Since the students have already deposited the fees, as has been observed hereinabove, we also feel it necessary to provide that the said deposition shall be subject to decision of the Committee as well as of this Court and the local authorities, or the State Government shall not take any step at the behest of any student to compel the petitioners to refund the fees, already charged, till the matter is finalised.

We are informed that second counseling also has been completed and the successful candidates have to take admission by depositing the fees, therefore, after considering the various aspects of the case, we feel it appropriate to provide that since in the admission taken in the first counseling, the colleges have charged the fees as Rs. 50,000/ or 56,000/-, they are permitted to charge it subject to decision of the Committee as well as of this Court, but the amount over and above to Rs. 27,536/-, as fixed by the State Government, shall be deposited with the University concerned by the colleges within fifteen days of the receipt of the fees, which shall be subject to further orders of this Court. This order shall be operative in other identical writ petitions except minority institutions.

Affidavits have been exchanged in this matter. Let the matter be listed for hearing alongwith other connected matters sometime in July, 2009.