IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, J.
Gourab Kumar Sadhu & Ors. Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondents
WPA 13054 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2024 With CAN 2 of 2024 With CAN 3 of 2025 With WPA 26400 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2025 With WPA 3028 of 2024 With CAN 3 of 2024 With CAN 5 of 2025
Decided On : 15-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal basis of fee structure and notification (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. arguments on fee revision authority and historical context (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. petitioners' arguments against mid-course fee enhancement (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 4. judicial analysis of notification applicability (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 5. legal implications of the fee adjustment (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 6. final judgment and dismissal of petitions (Para 54 , 55 , 56) |
JUDGMENT :
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.
Preface:
1. For the sake of thematic coherence, all three writ petitions are taken up for hearing together. The aforesaid writ petitions have been filed by a group of students presently pursuing the four-year B.Tech. Programme (Batch 2023–2027) at Dr. B.C. Engineering College, Durgapur, Paschim Burdwan, calling into question the legality and justifiability of Notification No. 466-Edn(T)/10M- 04/2004 (Part-IV) dated 16.10.2023 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Department of Higher Education, whereby a mid- course enhancement of fees was directed. The petitioners have, therefore, prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the said notification dated 16.10.2023. In addition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the college authorities to withdraw and/or cancel the revised fee structure appearing at Annexure-P-4 to the writ petition and to accept fees in accordance with the earlier fee structure as reflected in Annexure-P-2 to the writ petition.
Petitioners’ case:
2. Before entering into the merits of the issues involved in the present writ petition, it would be apposite to briefly advert to the facts leading to its institution.
3. In or about August 2023, the petitioners secured admission to the four-year B.Tech. undergraduate course in different departments of Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College, Durgapur, a self-financing engineering institution affiliated to Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology (for short, MAKAUT) and approved by the All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi (respondent no. 5 herein), as well as by the Department of Higher Education, Government of West Bengal, through the West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination (in short, WBJEE) and Joint Entrance Examination-Main ( in short, JEE-Main), conducted by National Testing Agency (in short, NTA) in 2023.
4. At the time of admission, the respondent college communicated a definitive and uniform fee structure, which was accepted by the petitioners as governing the financial terms of their academic engagement. Relying upon the aforesaid representation, the petitioners completed their admission formalities. Several petitioners, acting on the disclosed fee structure, applied for and obtained educational loans from various nationalised and private banking institutions, which were sanctioned strictly on the basis of the fee structure communicated by the respondent college.
5. In October 2023, the petitioners duly completed their registration. Upon such registration, the petitioners’ admissions stood formally confirmed, and the statutory window for withdrawal from, or migration to, any other institution for the relevant academic session stood closed.
6. Subsequent thereto, on 16th October, 2023, the Department of Higher Education, Government of West Bengal, issued Notification No. 466-Edn- (T)/10M-04/2004 (Part IV), whereby the upper fee ceiling for self-financing engineering colleges in the State was revised upwards, ostensibly to address increased operational and infrastructural costs.
7. In November 2023, after completion of the MAKAUT registration process, the respondent college authorities (respondent nos. 10–12), placing reliance on the aforesaid notification, issued a revised fee demand upon the petitioners with effect from the second semest
Court upheld the government's authority to revise fee structures mid-course in self-financing institutions based on regulations, as long as such changes were communicated at admission time, dismissin....
Once the fee is determined under Section 10(3) of the Act of 2007, the same is to remain intact for the period of three years and the students who have taken admission on the basis of such fees deter....
The respondents could not impose the conditions under the impugned clauses 10, 13, 21, and 22 while approving the fee structure in the petitioners' institute, as the conditions were not lawful and we....
Private educational institutions can set their own fee structures, provided they do not engage in profiteering or capitation fees, adhering to principles established in precedential Supreme Court cas....
The impugned Government order was illegal and arbitrary as it was issued in exercise of power under Section 7 of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitati....
Point of law : The proviso to Rule 8(3) provides that the Commission shall give the Institution an opportunity of being heard before fixing any fee or fees.
Point of law: The proviso to Rule 8(3) provides that the Commission shall give the Institution an opportunity of being heard before fixing any fee or fees.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.