Agarwal Vidyalaya Matriculation Higher Secondary School vs The State of Tamil Nadu

The petitioner challenges the order dated 24 September 2013 on the file of Private Schools Fee Determination Committee fixing the fees for the academic years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 by revising the earlier order dated 1 April, 2013.

The facts:

The petitioner is a minority institution originally affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education and presently following the Matriculation System governed by the Code of Regulations for Matriculation Schools.

The statutory committee appointed by the Government pursuant to the provisions of Act 22 of 2009 determined the fee for the academic years 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 by order dated 7 May 2010. The petitioner submitted objection, resulting in revising the order dated 7 May 2013. The petitioner thereafter submitted fresh materials for determination of fees for the academic years 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. The Committee passed an order dated 1 April 2013 determining the fee for three academic years. The petitioner immediately thereafter submitted its objection on 17 July 2013. The objection was considered by the Committee and thereafter the impugned order was passed determining the fees for the academic years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. The said order is challenged in this writ petition primarily on the ground that none of the grounds taken in the objection dated 17 July 2013 were considered by the Committee while determining the fees.

The second respondent filed a counter affidavit in answer to the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. According to the second respondent, the fee determination committee has evolved a method to assess the expenditure. Accordingly, fee in respect of the petitioner School was fixed form two academic years. The second respondent further contended that the petitioner has claimed exorbitant expenditure and the same was rightly disallowed by the Committee and a fair fee was fixed taking into account all vital aspects.

We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

The issue:

The only question that arises for consideration is whether the Private Schools Fee Determination Committee followed the guidelines given by the Division Bench in Lakshmi Matriculation School, (Formerly known as TVS Nursery and Primary School) Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai, The Chief Educational Officer, Madurai, The Special Officer, The Committee for Private Schools Fee Determination Headed by K.Govindarajan (Retired), Chennai 600006, , while determining the fee structure.

Discussion:

The Private Schools Fee Determination Committee originally passed an order dated 1 April 2013. Thereafter the petitioner submitted its detailed objection on 17 July, 2013. The petitioner has given certain facts and figures to substantiate its contention that the committee failed to take into account the actual expenditure incurred by the institution.

The impugned order dated 24 September 2013 does not contain details as to how the Committee arrived at certain expenditure for the purpose of determining the fees. The petitioner has taken up a contention that the staff strength of the School including the Principal is 101. However, the Committee fixed the staff strength at 83. The order does not contain any indication as to how the staff strength was fixed by the Committee.

Similarly, the petitioner claimed that a sum of Rs. 6,29,707/- was actually paid by way of electricity charges. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner consumed electricity for purposes other than educational purposes and as such the claim was disallowed. However, there is nothing on record to show that the Committee inspected the premises and arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner is having other buildings and the bill amount of Rs. 6,29,707/- was paid towards electricity charges for all these buildings including School building. There are other findings of similar nature which are not supported by any reasoning.

The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the Committee would look into the objections in detail and fresh orders would be passed on merits.

The Committee appears to have not followed the directions in Lakshmi Matriculation School. When this Court has given detailed guidelines as to how the fee should be determined, the Committee is expected to look into the guidelines while fixing the fees. The Committee is also expected to give reasoning and minimum details to show fee was determined in respect of an institution. Since the committee failed to follow the guidelines, we are of the view that the issue requires fresh consideration.

We are now in the middle of the academic year 2014-2015. There is no question of re-fixing the fee for the academic year 2014-2015. The issue raised by the petitioner requires to be considered by the Fee Determination Committee for the academic year commencing from 2015-2016.

Result:

In the result, the impugned order dated 24 September 2013 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the second respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner should be given reasonable opportunity to submit its response. In case, the Committee is of the view that inspection of the institution is necessary before passing final orders, necessarily such inspection should be made. The petitioner is directed to produce all the required documents so as to enable the committee to determine the fee. The Committee is directed to pass final orders on merits and in the light of the guidelines issued in Lakshmi Matriculation School, as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is allowed as indicated above. Consequently, the connected MP is closed. No costs.