No relief for Richmond School, as Delhi HC directs ₹75L payment

Delhi High Court upheld a ₹75 lakh deposit order against Richmond Global School for violating admission rules, citing the school's disregard for court directives.

New Delhi

On Tuesday, a bench of chief justice DK Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia observed that the amount was not disproportionate and had been imposed on the basis of an undertaking given by the school’s manager. (Representative photo)

A division bench of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday declined to stay a single judge’s order directing Richmond Global School to deposit ₹75 lakh for admitting students to classes 11 and 12, in violation of previous orders, and collecting fees from them.

The single judge’s order was passed in a petition filed by the school challenging CBSE’s March 8, 2025, decision withdrawing its affiliation and prohibiting it from fresh admissions or promoting students of lower classes to classes 9 and 11. On May 15, the court stayed the March 8 order, but prohibited new admissions to classes 11 and 12.

On Tuesday, a bench of chief justice DK Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia observed that the amount was not disproportionate and had been imposed on the basis of an undertaking given by the school’s manager. It, however, granted the school a week’s time to deposit the amount with the court’s Registrar General.

The single-judge bench directed it to deposit ₹75 lakh on December 24, 2025.

“We don’t find anything wrong in this order. It’s based on an undertaking… make the deposit please. You’re before a court of equity. There’s an undertaking that you have made before the single judge. Under which authority did you admit the students? What made you continue with the studies of these 120 students? Despite the court’s prohibition, you admitted them? How could you not comply with the orders?” the bench said to the school’s lawyer.

It added, “Just see the conduct. Imparting education can’t become a means of earning. It appears that the petitioner has a tendency to take courts for granted & none can be permitted to take the courts for a ride.”

The school asserted that the ₹75 lakh amount was arbitrary, disproportionate, and without jurisdiction, and that it ignored the CBSE bye-laws, which prescribe a maximum penalty of ₹5 lakh. The petition further stated that the fees collected were fully absorbed towards legitimate educational expenses.

However, CBSE’s counsel, MA Niyazi and Nehmat Sethi, contended that the amount represented unjust enrichment, having been collected by the school from students in violation of the court’s orders.