Bombay High Court refuses to decide (for now) on validity of Govt decision to bar private schools from hiking fees for 2020-21

The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to decide on the validity of the May 2020 Government Resolution (GR) which barred private schools from hiking their fees for the academic year 2020-21 in view of COVID-19 pandemic in petitions assailing the same.(Association of Indian School and ors v. State of Maharashtra and others)..A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni kept the question relating to the validity of GR open while leaving it to the government authorities to deal with complaints stemming from the said govt decision on a case-by-case basis..It would be open to the education authorities to decide any issue arising from the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Regulation of Fee) Act, 2011 read with the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Regulation of Fee)(Amendment) Act, 2018 and the impugned Government Resolution of May 8, 2020 with respect to any institution, the Court said. ."Interest of justice would be sufficiently served if the State considers the issues in regard to each of such educational institutions, on case to case basis, in the event any application/complaint is received by the State, against any institution of violation by such institution of any of the provisions of the 2011 Act read with the provisions of the Amendment Act, 2018 or the Government Resolution dated 8th May 2020, or even suo motu upon receipt of any information in that behalf," the order passed by the Court read..In the pleas which also assailed the notices issued by the Education Officers to the educational institutions consequent to the GR, it was contended by the State government that all the educational institutions have determined their fee structure for the academic year 2020-2021 in accordance with the amended provisions of the 2011 Act, and such fee structure has also been accepted and implemented before the GR came into force. .Senior Advocate Anil Anturkar, appearing on behalf of the State, made two-fold submissions:That the GR prohibiting increase of fees for the academic year 2020-21 would be applicable prospectivelyThe provisions of the amendment act of 2018 would not apply if the fee had been approved or the admission process has been initiated..Upon this submission, the petitioners said that if the GR has no retrospective application then that would take care of one aspect of their grievances..Perusing section 10 of the amendment act, the Court concluded that it was likely that the increase of fees of certain institutions may fall within the ambit of Section 10 or otherwise.Having held so, the Court proceeded to let the State resolve the complaints which each educational institution may raise on a case to case basis.."Having given our due consideration to the complexion of the issues arising in these proceedings, we are of the opinion that it may not be necessary for us to adjudicate these petitions on the prayers as made by the petitioners; suffice it to observe that these petitions can be disposed of leaving it open to the education authorities to decide any issue qua any of the institutions as may arise under the 2011 Act read with the Amendment Act, 2018 and the impugned Government Resolution dated 8th May 2020 in regard to the fees determined by any of such institutions, in the manner we propose to direct,” the Court said..The Court also made it clear that in the event of the State receiving any complaint in relation to an education institution, then such institution should not debar any student from attending either online or physical classes or attending examination on account of non-payment of only the “increased component of fees” in respect of the academic year 2020-21 or withhold the student's results. .“It is expressly clarified that what has been stated above does not entitle any parent to claim that the fees are not payable. It is further clarified that the above protection is only granted in the peculiar circumstances existing on account of the pandemic and therefore only for the Academic Year 2020-2021 and does not prevent the educational institutions from taking such actions as may be permissible in law against the students who are in arrears or have defaulted in payment of fees for the earlier academic years or subsequent academic years,” the Court added..The Court kept the question of the validity of the GR open while clarifying that the GR could not be construed as a direction to refund any fees collected for academic year 2020-21.All rights and contentions in this regard on the power of the State to conduct inquiry into violation of provisions of the Act was also kept open..The Court also vacated the stay imposed by it on the GR in June 2020. .[Read Judgment]