COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITTEE THROUGH REGIONAL DIRECTOR versus LAXMINARAYAN MISHRA & ORS.

Citation: [2014] 8 S.C.R. 604 · Decided: 16-04-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 8 S.C.R. 604 
A 
D.A.V. COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITIEE THROUGH 
REGIONAL DIRECTOR 
v. 
LAXMINARAYAN MISHRA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 4556 of 2014) 
B 
APRIL 16, 2014 
[R.M. LODHA AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] 
Education - Private unaided educational institutions -
C Appellant I DAV Public Schools operating in the State of 
Odisha - Fees levied by such schools - Plea for revision in 
fee structure - Plea of appellant that existing fee structure 
required upward revision in view of their liability to implement 
higher pay scales as recommended by the 6th Central Pay 
D Commission - On directions of Supreme Court, report 
submitted by Fee Structure Committee, Odisha headed by 
retired Judge of High Court - Objections raised by some 
parents 
(respondents) 
against 
the 
report 
and 
recommendations of the Fee Structure Committee - Held: No 
E merit in objection, witf) regard to competence or expertise of 
the Fee .Structure Commitft:Je - No good reason to take 
exceptioi;J,·fQ tltt;Jf~e structure recommended by it - Supreme 
Court re~tJ8Sited by :the Committee's Report that appellant; 
and instffdtiO.ns represented by it have been allowed only' 
F 
reasonat>fe pro/if t9 which they are entitled under law - Further, · 
th.e State :'!iJ.I; f)disha did not raise any objection to 
recommendatlOn.'$ of th.e Fee Structure Committee - Appellant. 
and· the · cq@e(Jle<J educational institutions represented by it 
entitled to' 1J1vi5$. their fee ·structure with immediate ·effect as. 
G per recommendations of the Fee Structure Committee - : 
Orissa Educatl0t1 Act, 1969. 
. 
I 
Education - Private unaided educational institutions - · 
Fees structure - Claim for revision of fees '- Need fori 
H 
604 
D.A.V. COLLEGE MAN. COMMITTEE THR. REG DIR. v. 
605 
LAXMINARAYAN MISHRA 
expeditious disposal - Held: If a private educational institution A 
. has met all the requirements of obtaining NOC and affiliation 
, etc. then its claim for revision of fees should be considered 
I 
! expeditiously on permissible parameters - Objections, if any, 
should be entertained only from the parents' representatives 
and not from individual parents - If a claim for revision of fees s 
is stalled for long due to meritless objections, it can affect 
academic standards on account of disgruntled staff and 
teachers who may even quit the institution for want of 
appropriate salary and perks. 
Vide the impugned judgment, the High Court held C 
that the appellant I DAV Public Schools operating in the 
State of Odisha, although private unaided educational 
institutions, were covered by the provisions of the Orissa 
Education Act, 1969 and hence the fees levied by such 
schools were subject to policy decisions of the State D 
Government and their Managing Committee should 
conform to the requirements of the Act of 1969 read with 
relevant Rules of 1991. The fee structure revised by the 
concerned schools was not approved by the State 
Government and the High Court held against the E 
appellant that revision of the fee structure could not be·· 
justified. 
This Court agreed with the cq_ntention of the 
appellant that existing fee structure required some F 
upward revision in view of appellant's case that it had 
decided to implement the higher pay scales as 
recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission, and 
issued direction to the appellant to make an application 
for fixation of fee structure of the school before the Fee G 
Structure Committee, Odisha headed by Justice K.P. 
Mahapatra, Retired Judge of High Court of Orissa. The 
Committee submitted its Report to this Court .. 
On behalf of the respondents, who are some parents 
aggrieved by the proposal to revise the fees, various H 
606 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
.[2014] 8 S.C.R. 
A 
objections were raised against the Report and 
recommendations of the Fee Structure Committee. 
According to them, such Committee had no statutory 
base and did not have the expertise or the competence 
to suggest fee structure for DAV schools in the State of 
B 
Odisha. It was also urged that the objections raised on 
behalf of parents before the Committee were not given 
due discussion and significance. 
Allowing the appeal and disposing of the petitions, 
C 
the Court 
HELD:1.1. The objections highlighted before the Fee 
Structure Committee were not at all substantial and they 
were dealt with appropriately by the Committee. There is 
also no merit in che objection with regard to competence 
D 
or expertise of the Fee Structure Co

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.