Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered appeals arising from a dispute over the fixation of fee structure for B.E. and B.Tech courses in private unaided professional institutions in Telangana for the block period 2016-2017 to 2018-2019. The Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (TAFRC), constituted under the Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (for Professional Courses offered in Private Unaided Professional Institutions) Rules, 2006, had initially determined fees at Rs.86,000 and Rs.91,000 per student, which was challenged by the institutions. The High Court remanded the matter, and the TAFRC redetermined a uniform fee of Rs.97,000 per student. The institutions again challenged this, and the High Court, finding the fixation improper, proceeded to fix the fee at Rs.1,60,000 and Rs.1,37,000 per student. The State of Telangana, the TAFRC, and a parents' association appealed against the High Court's order. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 226 by substituting its own view for that of the expert committee. The TAFRC, headed by a retired High Court Judge and comprising domain experts, had followed detailed guidelines and considered all relevant factors. Its determination was not arbitrary or perverse, and the mere possibility of a different view did not justify interference. The Court restored the TAFRC's fee structure of Rs.97,000 per student, noting that the block period was over and actual expenses were available for future determination. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders of the High Court were set aside.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review - Fee Fixation by Expert Committee - Scope of Interference - Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983, Section 15 read with Rules 4, 3(vii) - The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 226 by substituting its own view for that of the expert Fee Regulatory Committee, which had followed detailed guidelines and considered all relevant factors. The Committee's determination, not being arbitrary or perverse, ought not to have been interfered with. (Paras 2-7, 10-12) B) Education Law - Fee Regulation - Private Unaided Professional Institutions - Role of Fee Regulatory Committee - Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (for Professional Courses offered in Private Unaided Professional Institutions) Rules, 2006, Rules 3, 4 - The Committee, headed by a retired High Court Judge and comprising domain experts, is empowered to examine fee proposals and decide whether they are justified or amount to profiteering or capitation fee. The Committee's guidelines require submission of audited financial statements and consideration of factors like location, infrastructure, administration costs, and reasonable surplus. (Paras 8-10) C) Education Law - Fee Fixation - Block Period - Methodology - Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (for Professional Courses offered in Private Unaided Professional Institutions) Rules, 2006, Rule 4 - The Committee's adoption of a different methodology after remand (10% inflation and 15% furtherance) does not constitute arbitrariness. The High Court's re-determination of fee at Rs.1,60,000 and Rs.1,37,000 was set aside, and the Committee's uniform fee of Rs.97,000 per student was restored. (Paras 3, 5, 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the fee structure determined by the Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (TAFRC) and substituting its own determination in exercise of powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court, and restored the fee structure of Rs.97,000 per student as determined by the Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee for the block period 2016-2017 to 2018-2019.
Law Points
- Judicial review of fee fixation by expert committee
- Scope of interference under Article 226
- Principles of fee regulation for private unaided professional institutions
- Role of Fee Regulatory Committee
- No profiteering or capitation fee
