Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Asia Pacific Institute of Hotel Management, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, challenging an order dated 21.6.2018 passed by the respondent No.2 (Commissionerate of Technical Education). The impugned order restrained the petitioner from admitting students for the Academic Year 2018-19 on the allegation that the petitioner was charging fees in excess of the fees prescribed by the Fee Regulatory Committee. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus quashing the order and an interim stay of its operation. The petitioner argued that the order was passed without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing, in violation of the principles of natural justice, and was arbitrary and a colourable exercise of power. The respondents appeared through their advocates. The court, after hearing the parties, noted that the impugned order was passed without affording any hearing to the petitioner. The court held that such an order cannot be sustained as it violates the fundamental principles of natural justice. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the order dated 21.6.2018 and allowed the petition. The court directed that the petitioner be permitted to admit students for the Academic Year 2018-19, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not charge fees in excess of the fees prescribed by the Fee Regulatory Committee. The court also directed that the respondents may proceed with the inquiry regarding the alleged excess fee collection in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - The impugned order restraining the petitioner from admitting students was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The court held that such an order cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed. (Paras 1-3) B) Education Law - Fee Regulation - Restraint Order - The respondent No.2 passed an order restraining the petitioner from admitting students for the Academic Year 2018-19 on the ground that the petitioner was charging fees in excess of the fees prescribed by the Fee Regulatory Committee. The court found that the order was passed without any prior notice or hearing, and thus was arbitrary and illegal. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 21.6.2018 restraining the petitioner from admitting students for the Academic Year 2018-19 on the allegation of charging excess fees was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and was arbitrary.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the order dated 21.6.2018 and allowed the petition. The petitioner is permitted to admit students for the Academic Year 2018-19, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not charge fees in excess of the fees prescribed by the Fee Regulatory Committee. The respondents may proceed with the inquiry regarding the alleged excess fee collection in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- Right to be heard
- Mandamus
- Colourable exercise of power
- Fee Regulatory Committee
