Bombay HC seeks state, FRA reply to PIL on school fee hikes

The Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday sought a response from the state government and the Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA) to the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Atul Bhatkhalkar seeking directions to the school education department to constitute the divisional fee regulatory committees, to decide on the fee structure for the new academic year

The Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday sought a response from the state government and the Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA) to the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Atul Bhatkhalkar seeking directions to the school education department to constitute the divisional fee regulatory committees, to decide on the fee structure for the new academic year.

HT Image

The PIL has also sought orders restraining schools from hiking fees for the new academic year and to collect fees at a deducted rate in lieu of schools and colleges functioning virtually and not incurring overhead costs which are included by the FRA while fixing fees.

The division bench of justice Sunil Deshmukh and justice Girish Kulkarni, while hearing the PIL, was informed by senior advocate Dr Birendra Saraf that he was prompted to file the PIL after he received numerous complaints from parents in the western suburbs complaining of schools debarring their children from attending classes, as they had not paid fees.

Dr Saraf further submitted that the complaints were pertaining to aided and non-aided schools and the grievances from parents of regular students as well as students who had secured admission under the Right to Education Act.

The petition states that the schools after getting interim relief last year from the HC on the implementation of the May 8 government resolution had forced parents who were affected by the pandemic and faced financial difficulties to shell out the hiked fees. The government resolution (GR) had restrained schools from hiking fees for the academic year 2020-21.

The HC had, however, stayed the implementation of the GR but asked schools to allow parents to pay the fees in instalments and not debar students from attending school virtually or withhold their progress reports for non-payment of fees. The petition states that the schools had failed to comply with the latter order and had not only debarred students but also withheld the progress reports.

Dr Saraf further stated that the schools had not formed the executive committee for deciding on fee structure and hence as per the Maharashtra Fee Regulation Act, sought formation of the Divisional Fee Regulation Committee and also reduction of fees to 50% for students admitted to unaided schools under RTE Act. The PIL also prayed for a reduction in fees in lieu of virtual classes among other orders.

The additional government pleader for the state submitted that under the powers conferred upon the state government by the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Fee Regulation) Act, 2011 a Divisional Fee Regulatory Committee was already constituted and sought time to file an affidavit setting on record the information concerning the functioning and address of the authority which the court allowed and posted hearing of the PIL to June 22.