Educational institutions can claim fee reimbursement when scholarship payments are improperly withheld, regardless of student actions.

JUDGMENT :

SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

1. Heard Sri Apoorva Tewari, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.K. Khare, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of U.P. and perused the records.

2. The petitioner-C-MAT Business School has filed petition bearing Writ-C No. 8584 (M/S) of 2018 and Centre for Management and Technology has filed Writ Petition No. 8585 (M/S) of 2018 seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to make payment of scholarship and fee reimbursement to them for the students admitted in the institution for the courses mentioned in para 4 of the writ petitions for the academic sessions 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016- 17 in consonance with the provisions contained in Uttar Pradesh Anushuchit / Anusuchit Janjati / Samanya Varg / Alpsankhyak / Pichhdi Jati Dashmottar Chhatravritti Yojna, 2012.

3. On 28.09.2021, an order was passed in Writ Petition Nos. 8584 & 8585 recording that the fee reimbursement for the session 2013-14 had not been made to the petitioners without assigning any reason. In regard to academic sessions 2014-15 and 2016-17, show cause notices had been issued to the petitioners and they had submitted replies to the notices but no decision had been taken thereon. The learned Standing Counsel was granted time to seek instructions in the matter whether the inquiry had been concluded and why the money allocated for the year 2013-14 had not been paid to the petitioners. On 14.03.2022, this Court granted two weeks further time to the learned Standing Counsel directing for filing a specific affidavit indicating:-

A. As to why the scholarship for the year 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 had not been paid?

B. As to whether any inquiry was pending for the purpose of scholarship reimbursement for the aforesaid years and if not

C. what was the impediment in reimbursement of the scholarship for the aforesaid years?

4. The Deputy Director, Directorate Social Welfare, U.P. filed a supplementary affidavit stating that in the year 2013-14, there were certain complaints regarding financial irregularities that took place in the year 2012-13. Therefore, the amount allocated for the year 2013-14 could not be disbursed and it lapsed. The supplementary affidavit specifically stated that the inquiry against the petitioners’ institution has been conducted by a committee headed by the Additional District Magistrate. The Committee submitted its report on 07.05.2015. Another inquiry pertaining to the year 2016-17 had also been completed by the District Statistical Officer, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida and no inquiry was pending against the petitioners thereafter. The inquiry report mentions that no allegation could be established in inquiry. Therefore, there is no allegation that any irregularity or illegality has been committed by any of the petitioners.

5. It was also stated in the supplementary affidavit that the Director, Social Welfare had sent a letter dated 26.05.2022 to the State Government for reimbursement of the amount of scholarship but the State Government rejected the request by means of a letter dated 14.06.2022. A copy of the letter dated 14.06.2022 written by the State Government to the Director Social Welfare was annexed with this supplementary affidavit.

6. Thereafter orders were passed in Writ Petition Nos. 8484 and 8485 (M/S) of 2018 granting liberty to the petitioners to challenge the order dated 14.06.2022. The petitioners accordingly filed Writ C Nos. 4838 of 2024 and 4836 of 2024 challenging validity of the order dated 14.06.2022 passed by the State Government. Both the writ petitions were disposed off by separate orders passed on 29.05.2024 on identical terms, setting aside the order dated 14.06.2022 for the reason that the order was not