Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences Office vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Aggrieved by the order Annexure P/1 passed by the respondent No.3-Admission Fee Regulatory Commission (in short “AFRC”) dated 21.09.2022 the present writ petition has been filed. Vide the said order the respondent No.3 has passed an interim order so far as the fees structure for the petitioner-Establishment for the clinical and non-clinical post graduation course at the petitioner-Establishment. The respondent No.3 has fixed an interim fees between Rs.6 lakhs to Rs.8.5 lakhs for the different courses of post graduate clinical and non-clinical courses at the petitioner-Establishment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the previous year, the petitioner-Establishment were permitted to charge fees from the students between 19.5 lakhs to Rs.37 lakhs per year, which according to the petitioner was approved by the DME (Director Medical Education). According to the counsel for the petitioner, the approval by the DME was for the reason that during the said period the AFRC was not functional.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the interim fees as of now ordered by the respondent No.3 is extremely on the lower side. That with the said fees the petitioner-Establishment would not be in a position to sustain themselves for the said PG courses. According to the petitioner, under the requirement of law, there are huge administrative expenses that are required to be incurred like; the payment of stipend to the PG students, which itself is more than Rs.50,000 a month per student and which alone is a substantial amount to be paid. That roughly the petitioner-Establishment has to incur an expense of roughly Rs.9 crore annually and which would be very difficult to meet if the admissions are permitted to be given at the interim fees fixed by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure P/1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that firstly the AFRC does not have any power for passing orders of collection of fees by way of interim directions. Nothing prevents the AFRC to fix the final Fees Schedule in respect of the private medical colleges being run in the State. That the fees so fixed by the AFRC also has to be reasonable and fair enough ensuring that the Establishment does not incur any financial burden in the continuation of the said course.

Learned State counsel on the other hand submits that the need for the passing of the interim order by the respondent No.3 was on account of non-availability of certain material datas, which the petitioner was required to submit and subject to the petitioner furnishing the same, the AFRC shall make all endeavors in giving the final report at the earliest.

At this juncture the learned counsel for the petitioner makes a proposal that as of now this Court may permit them to carry on the admissions on some higher interim fees structure. A specific undertaking is made by the petitioner that in the event if the AFRC at the later stage takes a final decision and fixes the fees less than that has been permitted by this Court by way of today's interim arrangement, the petitioner shall ensure that the excess fees collected shall be refunded back to the respective students or adjusted against future fees. Further, in case if the fees to be fixed by the AFRC is on the higher side, then the petitioner should also be given liberty to collect the balance of difference of fees.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on an average the fees structure for the previous years PG courses both clinical and non-clinical was between Rs.10 lakhs to Rs.37.85 lakhs, which was acceptable to the DME. The respondents have further sent a proposal for enhanced fees structure for the present academic session through the respondent No.3 for consideration of the fees structure for the petitioner-Establishment vide their application dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure P/7) and where the petitioner-Establishment have enhanced the previous fee structure taking into consideration the rise in cost of the maintenance of the petitioner-Establishment. The said application is yet to be considered by the respondent No.3.

Given the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly taking into consideration the undertaking that has been given by the counsel for the petitioner and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner-Establishment in the previous year were permitted to admit students at the fees structure as provided in the writ petition, which was acceptable to the DME. Undoubtedly the interim fees fixed by the AFRC as compared to the fees charged in the previous year is extremely on the lower side.

Given the fact that the matter is still pending consideration before the AFRC i.e. respondent No.3 for taking a final decision, as of now since the petitioner-Establishment have to provide admission to the students in the different PG courses both clinical and non-clinical. The interim fees which is required to be charged by the petitioner-Establishment should be something reasonable subject to the final report by the respondent No.3. Accordingly, purely as an interim measure this Court as of now is of the opinion that let the petitioner-Establishment undertake admissions for the present year as of now with the interim fees structure of Rs. 25 lakhs for the clinical courses and Rs.6 lakhs for the non-clinical courses. Further, let a specific clear fresh undertaking be given by the petitioner to the respondent No.3 that in the event if the final report that the respondent No.3 shall pass, the amount of excess fees, if any charged by the petitioner shall be refunded to the respective students or would be adjusted to the future fees.

It is made clear that the said refund would be subject to the right of the petitioner to challenge the recommendations made by the AFRC before the appropriate forum concerned and is finalized thereafter. It is further observed that the respondent No.3 shall make all endeavors to ensure that the report for the present academic session is finalized at the earliest preferably within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is further observed that the petitioner also shall make available all such information sought by the respondent No.3 in writing for taking a final decision on the fees structure part.

The petitioner-institute is further directed to ensure that the entire amount may not be insisted upon to be paid by the students in onego. Some relaxation may be given so that the students should not be burdened. In other words, the petitioner should not take any co-ercive steps against the students only on account of the students not paying the entire amount, but intend to pay the entire amount in installments.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.