The main legal point established in the judgment is the autonomy of educational institutions in fee fixation, subject to regulations and oversight by the Committee for Determination of Fee Structure.

( 1 )

( 2 ) SINCE the facts that are germane for deciding this Petition are not in controversy, learned counsel for the parties have consented to the final disposal of the Writ Petition itself. Arguments have been addressed in great detail.

( 3 ) THE facts are that the Petitioner/society had set up in the year 1996 a technical institute in the name and style of Institute of Technology and Management at Gurgaon, Haryana, as an unaided self-financed professional college. The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) had approved its intake capacity of 160 students in respect of the academic year 1996-1997. Presently, the Society has the approval of the AICTE to admit 370 students for the academic year 2002-2005. It is contended by Mr. Uday Lalit, learned counsel for the Society that it had run into losses, ostensibly because the non-resident quota was not fully utilised. under the scheme established by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Unnikrishnan, J. P. vs. State of A. P. , 1993 SC 2178: (1993) 1 SCC 645. Unnikrishnan s case (supra), however, has been reviewed by the Eleven Judge Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in T. M. A. Pai Foundation and Others vs. State of Karnataka and Others, (2002) 8 SCC 481 and a substantially different regime has been established. TMA Pai has further been explained by a Constitution Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Islamic Academy of Education and Another vs. State of Karnataka and Others, (2003) 6 SCC 697.

( 4 ) IN January, 2003, the Society framed its Scheme for admission of students on merit-based selection criteria and also fixed the fee payable by the students, purportedly in consonance with the TMA Pai dictat, at Rs. 60,700. 00 per year together with Rs. 8,400. 00 as Development charges and other sundry charges, aggregating Rs. 69,200. 00 annually. On 10. 3. 2003 the AICTE issued a Public Notice informing of its interim Policy Regulations which would govern admissions to technical colleges in the academic year 2003-2004, inter alia, prescribing that the fee payable by students would be fixed by the State Level Committee. There is a mention in the Petition of the unconstitutionality of the AICTE dictat mandating that admissions have to be made only from the Merit List prepared by governmental authorities and that at least 85 per cent of the seats would have to be filled-up by counselling conducted by such governmental authorities. It appears that admissions/selection of students has been completed by adherence to these norms. In these proceedings, however, the controversy centres around the uniform tuition fee fixed by the AICTE. Hence, all other questions are not considered or covered by this judgement.

( 5 ) THE interim Policy Regulations which has been published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-III, Section 4, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 23 of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987, stipulates inter alia as follows:-

" In order to facilitate the institutions to work out a reasonable fee structure the AICTE, in pursuance of its statutory obligations under Section 10 (j) of AICTE Act, which empowers to AICTE to fix Norms and Guidelines for charging tuition and other fees, would draft guidelines for fee fixation. The task of drafting of guidelines/formula for fee fixation will be assigned to a high-powered a committee to be appointed by AICTE/mhrd, Govt. of India comprising members from academia, subject experts and economic and financial experts. Till such time, as an interim arrangement, the State Government may decide a uniform fee structure, to be made applicable to all the students including those of management seats, for the current academic year through its Fee Committee comprising members drawn from academia and financial experts, already constituted (to be constituted, if necessary) as per existing Regulations of AICTE. There shall be no payment and free category of fees as directed by the Hon ble