A private educational institution cannot collect fees from students without obtaining permission from the UGC or the State Government to run the institute as a distance education programme study centre.

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

1. “Mata shatru pita bairi, yena balo na pathita. Na shobhate sabha madhye hans madhye bako yatha.”

This is a Sanskrit saying espousing the importance of education. It means that “Parents who do not educate their children are their children’s enemies. Such children look as awkward in any gathering, as a Stork amongst dainty Swans.”

2. Education is an investment made by the nation in its children for harvesting future crop of responsible adults productive of a well-functioning society (Refer Rohit Singhal Vs. Jawahar Navodya Vidyalaya, (2003) 1 SCC 687).

3. Since common questions of law and fact arise for consideration, therefore, both these writ petitions were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by way of a common judgment.

4. These petitions are directed against the order passed in case Nos. 2 and 3 of 2012, whereby respondent No. 2 directed the petitioners to jointly and severally refund the fees taken from private respondents.

The facts in brief may be noticed.

5. The petitioner institute is a registered education society, under the Societies Registration Act, 2006 and would claim that it was recognized by the Sikkim Manipal University and thus entitled to run various courses on its behalf.

6. It appears that the private respondents filed petition under Section 11 of the H.P. Private Educational Institutions (Regulatory Commission), Act, 2010 (for short the “Act”) and Rule 6 of the H.P. Private Educational Institutions (Regulatory Commission) Rules, 2011 (for short the “Rules”), claiming refund of admission fee paid to the petitioner for MBA PGDM course, on the ground that the same was exorbitant and had never been approved either by the State Government or by the UGC.

7. These petitions were contested by the petitioner and vide impugned order, the petitioner was directed to refund the fee. The impugned orders have been challenged on the ground that respondent No. 2 had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition, as the dispute relating to Sikkim Manipal University was beyond its territorial jurisdiction and further that the private respondents did not fall within the definition of students, therefore, also their claim before the respondent No. 2 was not maintainable.

8. Only respondent No. 2 has contested the petition by filing reply wherein it has been averred that University established or incorporated by or under a State Act is to operate only within the territorial jurisdiction allotted to it under its Act and in no case can it operate beyond the territory of the State of its location. It has further been averred that the private Universities and deemed Universities cannot affiliate any college or institution for conducting courses leading to award of its diploma, degrees or other qualifications and that no University whether Central, State or deemed can offer its programmes through franchising arrangement with private coaching institutions even for the purpose of conducting courses through distance education. It is then averred that the prospectus issued by the petitioner would show that the institute has been recognized by Sikkim Manipal University and whereas the Sikkim Manipal University, as per the official website of the University Grants Commission, is a State private University, therefore, the petitioner institute could not have been affiliated to this University and was thus illegally claiming to have been recognized by Sikkim Manipal University. Once the petitioner was not authorized to act as franchisee or affiliated Institute of Sikkim Manipal University, therefore, it could not have collected any fee from the students.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

9. This Court can take judicial notice of the fact that number of fraudulent boards and institutions are coming up in the country with a primary aim of duping the public in the field of education, by presenting imaginary and illusionary picture for m