1. Fee revision for professional courses by self-financing HEIs after admission process concluded. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(SC) 1254
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Alok Aradhe, JJ.
Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
The State Of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 13769 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 13237 of 2026 With Civil Appeal Nos. 13770-13771 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 13690-13691 of 2026 With Civil Appeal No. 13772 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 16753 of 2026 With Civil Appeal Nos. 13774-13775 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 14913-14914 of 2026 With Civil Appeal Nos. 13776-13777 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 15617-15618 of 2026 With Civil Appeal No. 16678 of 2026 @ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 16677 of 2026
Decided On : 14-10-2026
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Harin Raval, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rauf Rahim, Sr. Adv. Mr. Firdous Samim, Adv. Mr. Ali Asghar Rahim, Adv. Ms. Gopa Biswas, Adv. Mr. Mohsin Rahim, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dibyadyuti Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Sumedha Halder, Adv. Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR Ms. Astha, Adv. Mr. Navneet Singh, Adv. Mr. Pranshu Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Kumar Neeraj, Adv. Mr. Vishal Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Balmiki Prasad, Adv. Mr. R.s.mishra, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Singh, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ayush Kumar Shukla, Adv. Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rajlakshmi, Adv. Mr. Uddyam Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Swapnil Pattanayak, Adv. Ms. Kratika Kushwaha, Adv. Mr. Harish Pandey- 1715, AOR Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv.
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Harin Raval, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rauf Rahim, Sr. Adv. Mr. Firdous Samim, Adv. Mr. Ali Asghar Rahim, Adv. Ms. Gopa Biswas, Adv. Mr. Mohsin Rahim, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dibyadyuti Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Sumedha Halder, Adv. Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR Ms. Astha, Adv. Mr. Navneet Singh, Adv. Mr. Pranshu Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Kumar Neeraj, Adv. Mr. Vishal Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Balmiki Prasad, Adv. Mr. R.s.mishra, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Singh, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ayush Kumar Shukla, Adv. Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rajlakshmi, Adv. Mr. Uddyam Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Swapnil Pattanayak, Adv. Ms. Kratika Kushwaha, Adv. Mr. Harish Pandey- 1715, AOR Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv.
Fees for professional courses in self-financing institutions must be notified before admission to ensure financial certainty for students. Midstream variations are impermissible except in exceptional circumstances involving unforeseen expenditure, as predictability is essential for students and their families.
Headnote:(A) AICTE (Norms and Guidelines for Fees and Guidelines for Admission in Professional Colleges) Regulations, 1994 - Regulation 7 - National Education Policy, 2020 - Determination of fees in self-financing professional higher educational institutions - Fee structure determined at the commencement of a professional course cannot be varied midstream - Determination of fees involves balancing three legitimate interests: the interest of students and parents in certainty and predictability of a reasonable fee; the interest of self-financing institutions in securing adequate resources for quality education and development; and the societal interest in ensuring reasonable fee fixation through regulatory committees (Paras 2, 18).
(B) Regulatory mechanism and Institutional Efficiency - Fee fixation committees perform an important public function and must operate with efficiency, expertise, and integrity - High Courts should exercise judicial review to ensure these bodies perform their duties effectively - Fee determination must be completed before the commencement of the admission process to provide meaningful financial certainty to students and their families (Paras 2, 28, 29, 32).
(C) Variation of Fees - A regulatory regime necessitates that the relevant authorities notify fees payable for the entire course before a student takes admission - Variation in fees during the subsistence of the course is permissible only in exceptional instances, such as unforeseen increase in expenditure, and cannot substitute for timely institutional planning (Paras 32, 36(ii)).
Facts of the case:
A self-financing professional college conducted admissions for a four-year professional course. After the admission process concluded and classes commenced, the State Government issued a notification revising the upper ceiling of fees chargeable by such institutions. The college subsequently revised its fee structure, resulting in a significant increase in tuition and the imposition of a new development fee for the already admitted cohort. The students challenged the legality of this midstream fee hike before the High Court.
Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the conclusion that fees determined at the commencement of the course cannot be varied midstream. While it disagreed with the High Court's reasoning regarding retrospective obligation and the application of equity and estoppel based on the admission brochure, it affirmed the result based on the principle of certainty and regulatory requirements.
Issues: Whether the fee payable for professional education through self-financing higher educational institutions can be revised midstream after the admission process for a specific cohort has been concluded.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the regulatory framework, including the AICTE Regulations and National Education Policy, requires that fees for the entire course be notified before admission to ensure financial predictability and transparency for students. Because the State and the fee fixation committees failed to complete the revision exercise before the academic session began, the resulting mid-course fee hike was impermissible. Variation during the course is only allowed in exceptional, unforeseen circumstances.
Result: Final directions of the High Court holding that the revised fee structure is not applicable to students whose admission process stood completed before the notification date are affirmed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- constitutional law
- education law
- contract law
-
practice and procedure
- writ jurisdiction (Para 12)
Table of Contents
2. Students: midstream fee hike illegal. College: fee change clause in prospectus and government notification permitted revision. (Para 11 , 12 )
3. Fee fixation requires balancing student certainty and institutional viability through efficient regulatory mechanisms. (Para 18 , 21 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 )
4. Fees for professional course duration must be determined before admission; midstream variation only in exceptional unforeseen circumstances. (Para 33 , 36 )
5. High Court order affirming inapplicability of revised fees to already-admitted students upheld; appeals partly allowed. (Para 36 , 37 )
6. Can fees for professional education be changed midstream for already-admitted students?
No. Fee must be determined for the entire course before admission. Midstream variation is permissible only in exceptional, unforeseen circumstances. (Para 2 , 33 , 36 )
7. What interests must be balanced in fixing professional course fees?
Student and parent interest in certainty and reasonable fee, and institutional interest in adequate resources for quality education and development. (Para 2 , 18 )
8. What is the role of fee fixation committees under AICTE Regulations?
Committees must act as institutional bodies, performing duties with efficiency and expertise. Fee revision requires minimum three-year gap and cost-based recommendations. (Para 28 , 30 )
9. Can a prospectus clause making fees subject to change justify midstream revision?
No. Such a clause does not override the principle of fee certainty for the course duration. The regulatory framework supersedes such contractual clauses. (Para 12 , 35 )
10. What is the effect of delayed fee revision by the government on current students?
Revised fees due to delayed government action cannot be imposed on students already admitted. Certainty principle protects them from retrospective application. (Para 34 , 36 )
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
2. The question for our consideration is whether fee payable for professional education through self-financing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) can be changed midstream. While we uphold the decision of the division bench of the High Court,1[Common judgment and order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the Calcutta High Court in MAT No. 268 of 2026, FMA No. 284 of 2026, and FMA No. 288 of 2026, reported as Tanushri Mondal and Others v State of West Bengal and Others , 2026 SCC OnLine Cal 2382.] that the fees determined at the commencement of the course cannot be varied midstream, for the independent and separate reasons to follow, we have held that determination of the fee payable for professional education such as medicine, engineering, pharmacy etc. conducted by professional HEIs involves balancing of two legitimate interests. Firstly, the interest of students and their parents in fixation of a reasonable fee, as also the certainty about the quantum and the time. Secondly, the interest of self-financing HEIs in securing adequate resources for developing necessary infrastructure and provide quality education. Pursuant to the judgments of this Court in TMA Pai Foundation and Others v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2002) 8 SCC 481 and P.A. Inamdar and Others v. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2005) 6 SCC 537 fee fixation committees constituted for determining the appropriate fee payable must be given institutional status. They are virtually the regulatory bodies for determining the appropriate fee and must therefore perform their duties with efficiency, expertise and integrity. As they perform an important public function, their actions are subject to review.
Facts
3. The West Bengal Joint Entrance Examinations (‘WBJEE’) 2023 was conducted on 30.04.2023 for admissions to engineering colleges in West Bengal with respect to courses commencing from the 2023-24 Academic Year (‘AY’). WBJEE results were declared on 26.05.2023. Parallelly, results of the Joint Entrance Examination (Main) (‘JEE (Main)’) were also declared, and candidates were ranked in order of merit with respect to both examinations, with both sets of scores and ranks for admission to engineering colleges under the counselling process.
4. The West Bengal Joint Entrance Examinations Board, a statutory body, conducted the WBJEE Centralised Counselling between July-August 2023. After conclusion of the counselling process, candidates reported to their allocated colleges, had their documents verified, and, upon deposit of fees, their admission processes were concluded. In September 2023, the Respondents-Students were admitted as students of Bachelor of Technology (‘B.Tech.’) courses, for the 2023-27 cohort, at the Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College (‘the Appellant-College’), a self-financing college affiliated to the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology.
5. It is important to note that the prospectus of the Appellant-College had a specific clause stating that, “fee structure is subject to change from time to time as per Government decision.” The following is a simplified version of the per-semester fee structure that was applicable to students who had joined the 2023-27 cohort:
| For B. Tech. (CSE/IT/ECE) | ||||
| Academic Year | Tuition Fee | Total (Without Hostel) | Total (With Hostel) | |
| 2023-24 | Rs.44,000/- | Rs.71,050 + Rs.46,450 | Rs.1,06,050 + Rs.79,450 | |
| 2024-25 | Rs.45,100/- | Rs.47,550/- | Rs.85,350 + Rs.80,550 | |
| 2025-26 | Rs.46,200/- | Rs.50,650 + Rs.48,650 | Rs.88,450 + Rs.81,650 | |
| 2026-27 | Rs.47,300/- | Rs.49,750/- | Rs.87,550 + Rs.82,750 | |
| For B. Tech. (EE/ME/CE/CSD/CSE(AIML)/CSE(DS)) | ||||
| Academic Year | Tuition Fee | Total (Without Hostel) | Total (With Hostel) | |
| 2023-24 | Rs.40,000/- | Rs.67,050 + Rs.42,450 | Rs.1,02,050 + Rs.75,450 | |
| 2024-25 | Rs.41,000/- | Rs.43,450 | ||
