Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
J. Priyadarshini – Appellant
Versus
Registrar, the Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's payment of excess fees. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent's defense against excess fee claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis of fee collection violations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. conclusion and order on compensation. (Para 12) |
ORDER :
1. This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to repay the sum of Rs.20,01,400/- which is collected in excess of the fee fixed by the Fee Fixation Committee for the years 2015- 2024 and also to direct the third respondent to pay the compensation to the petitioner as fixed by this Court for not applying proper certificates namely, PC-1 and PC-2 and CRI completion certificate before the second respondent and collection of extra fees throughout the years.
2. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined the third respondent institution on 28.10.2015 for the B.D.S., Course under the management quota. It is her case that over and above the fee fixed, every year, excess fee has been obtained from her. She had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- capitation fee in cash and excess tuiti
Educational institutions must adhere strictly to fee structures mandated by governing bodies, and violations merit reimbursement and compensation.
The court established that delays in seeking relief under Article 226 do not bar claims when fundamental rights are violated, especially in cases involving mistakes or fraud.
Court disposed writ petition after recording respondent's counter that no excess fees collected and petitioner attended classes regularly.
The prohibition of capitation fees under the Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitalisation of Fee) Act, 1992 and the Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of....
Court directs consideration of representation against advance fee collection without merits adjudication.
The Fee Fixation Committee is authorized to verify school fees against provided facilities, and the trial court's order directing this verification was upheld with specific modifications regarding th....
The court reaffirmed that fee fixation determined by a committee must apply prospectively and cannot retroactively impose a refund on students admitted prior to the fee committee's ruling.
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....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
