In a ruling on the PIL by parents seeking uniformity in fees in all schools from Kindergarten to junior college, Justices Atul Chandurkar and Vrushali Joshi of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court noted that because each school offers different amenities and has a different level of teaching quality, it is possible that each school’s fee structure will be different from the others.
The HC has noted that the fees are likely to vary for each school for a variety of reasons, notwithstanding the fact that it is clear that there cannot be any uniformity in the fee structure of aided and unaided schools in the State. The provisions of the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Regulation of Fee) Act, 2011, being comprehensive in nature, would be liable to be referred to in case, there is a dispute about imposition of fees, even though no direction for having uniformity in the fee- structure at par with Government Schools can be granted.
The modality for resolution of such issues has been provided there. The grievance is, therefore, required to be raised and adjudicated in the manner prescribed therein. The petitioners have joined the Deputy Director of Education, School of Scholars and others as respondents to the petition. The HC has also stated that the Act also provides for the constitution of a Division Fee Regulatory Committee (DFRC), which is empowered to consider grievances pertaining to imposition of fees, including extra charges.
The Act also contemplates formation of Parents-Teachers Association (PTA) and prohibits collection of excess fee. Later an executive committee was constituted for considering the issue of fixation of the fee structure. An appeal can be filed against the decision of this Committee on increase of fee by the school management before the DFRC.
The HC has made it clear that the Act is a Code in itself and contains penal provisions for breach. The Court has stated that the factors to be considered while deciding the fee structure including the provision of instalment has been also provided.
Advocate K B Ambilwade appeared for the petitioners.