Delhi high court extends order on school fee committees until February 23

On February 9, the high court asked the DoE to refrain until February 20 from insisting on the constitution of school-level fee regulation committees

The The Delhi high court on Friday extended until February 23 its earlier interim order directing the Delhi government’s Directorate of Education (DoE) not to insist on schools constituting fee regulation committees for fixing fees for the three academic years commencing 2026–27, even as it questioned the schools on what impediment prevented them from setting up the committees.

The DoE submitted to the Delhi High Court that any delay in implementing the statutory framework governing the fee structure from April 1 would frustrate the very objective of the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act, 2025. (HT Archive)

The DoE on February 1 issued a notification, titled the Delhi School Education (Removal of Difficulties) Order, mandating all schools to constitute school-level fee regulation committees (SLFRCs) by February 10 for fixing fees for three academic years commencing 2026–27.

The notification was challenged by the Forum of Minority Schools and the Action Committee of Unaided Recognised Private Schools on the grounds that the order was contrary to the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act, 2025, which provides that such committees must be formed only by July 15. On February 9, the high court asked the DoE to refrain until February 20 from insisting on the constitution of SLFRCs.

A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia extended this February 9 order till February 23, stating that it would pass a detailed order on the aspect of a stay of the February 1 notification on Tuesday, after hearing the DoE’s counsel.

“We have heard the counsel for the petitioner on the prayer for a grant of stay... We’ll pronounce the order on the stay on Tuesday… The interim order will continue. Since the hearing on the application is going on, curtailing the stay will not be good. We will extend it till the next date of hearing,” the bench said.

However, the court also questioned the schools on the constitution of the committees. “What is the difficulty in the constitution of the committees? We are currently on the interim order. We had extended the date till today, why can’t you constitute the committees? What is the difficulty in that? If by not forming the committees nothing is going to happen, then nothing will happen even if they are formed,” the bench said to the petitioner lawyers.

During the hearing, lawyers for the Action Committee of Unaided Recognised Private Schools, Akhil Sibal and Kamal Gupta, asserted that modifying the timeline by issuing a government order was impermissible and that the same could only be done by amending the Act.

However, DoE’s lawyer, additional solicitor general S V Raju, asserted that the consequences of staying the notification would be disastrous and that the constitution of the committees would not prejudice the schools.

In its reply filed on Monday, the DoE justified the decision, saying that it was a “one-time measure” undertaken to facilitate the implementation of a regulated fee structure for the upcoming academic session beginning April 1.

The DoE submitted that any delay in implementing the statutory framework governing the fee structure from April 1 would frustrate the very objective of the Act. Such a delay, it said, could undermine efforts to curb profiteering and would prevent the regulated fee structure from being applied from the start of the academic session.