Back
2020 Supreme(MP) 1208
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (INDORE BENCH)
S.C. Sharma, Shailendra Shukla, JJ.
Icon Education Society - Appellants
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 9690/2020
Decided On : 19-11-2020
For the Appellant : S.C. Bagadia, Learned Senior Counsel and Rohit Saboo
For the Respondents:Vivek Dalal, Learned Additional Advocate General, Kirti Patwardhan, Learned Panel Lawyer and Shraddha Dixit
The right to establish and administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India is not absolute and can be subjected to reasonable restrictions in the national interest.
Headnote:
MADHYA PRADESH NIJI VYAVASAYIK SHIKSHAN SANSTHA (PRAVESH KA VINIYAMAN AVAM SHULK KA NIRDHARAN) ADHINIYAM, 2007 - SECTION 9 - FIXATION OF FEES - MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS - EXEMPTION - CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY - ARTICLE 30(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - RIGHT TO ESTABLISH AND ADMINISTER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS - REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS - NATIONAL INTEREST - EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION - MERIT-BASED SELECTION OF TEACHERS - COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS - STATE LEGISLATURE'S COMPETENCE TO ENACT THE STATUTE - JUDICIAL SCRUTINY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a minority educational institution, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007 (Act of 2007), which provides for the regulation of admission and fixation of fees in private professional educational institutions in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner contended that the Act was violative of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to establish and administer educational institutions to minorities, and that minority educational institutions were exempt from the regulatory control of the State Government.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Act of 2007 was constitutionally valid and that it did not violate the rights of minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The Court observed that the right to establish and administer educational institutions was not absolute and that reasonable restrictions could be imposed on this right in the national interest. The Court further held that the State Legislature was competent to enact the statute and that the Act was a valid exercise of the State's legislative power. The Court also held that the provisions of the Act, including Section 9, were designed to ensure that private professional educational institutions did not charge exorbitant fees and that the fee structure was reasonable and transparent.
Issues: 1. Whether the Act of 2007 was violative of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to establish and administer educational institutions to minorities? 2. Whether minority educational institutions were exempt from the regulatory control of the State Government? 3. Whether the State Legislature was competent to enact the Act of 2007? 4. Whether the provisions of the Act, including Section 9, were designed to ensure that private professional educational institutions did not charge exorbitant fees and that the fee structure was reasonable and transparent?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The right to establish and administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India is not absolute and can be subjected to reasonable restrictions in the national interest. 2. Minority educational institutions are not exempt from the regulatory control of the State Government. 3. The State Legislature is competent to enact legislation regulating the admission and fixation of fees in private professional educational institutions. 4. The provisions of the Act of 2007, including Section 9, are designed to ensure that private professional educational institutions do not charge exorbitant fees and that the fee structure is reasonable and transparent.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition and upheld the constitutional validity of the Act of 2007.
ORDER :
S.C. Sharma, J.
1. The petitioner before this Court Icon Education Society has filed this present petition being aggrieved by letter dated 14/11/2019 issued by Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee, State of Madhya Pradesh, order dated 10/01/2020 passed in Appeal No. 189/2019 by Appellate Authority, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee and order dated 06/03/2020 passed in Review/02/2020 by Appellate Authority, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee.
2. The petitioner's contention is that the petitioner Society is a Society registered under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 and is running educational Institutions in the name and style of Indore Institute of Law, Indore Nursing College and Idyllic Institute of Management. The petitioner has further stated that a certificate has been granted by Backward Classes and Minority Welfare Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh declaring the petitioner as Minority Educational Institute. The certificate was granted on 27/05/2015.
3. It has been further stated that Indore Institute of Law and Indore Nursing College were also declared as Minority Education Institute under Section 2(g) of National Commission for Minorities Educational Institutions, 2004 and the Colleges are entitled for all the privileges and benefits as declared by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutes and the Government of Madhya Pradesh from time to time.
4. The petitioner has further stated that vide letter dated 08/07/2019 and 24/07/2019, the respondent No. 2 directed the petitioner to submit details enabling the respondent No. 2 to determine the tuition fees for the academic year 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 and the petitioner submitted a reply on 31/07/2019 stating that the petitioner is a private unaided Minority Educational Institution and does not fall within the jurisdiction of Madhya Pradesh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Adhiniyam, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of 2007")
5. The petitioner's contention is that the petitioner Institute being a Minority Institute does not fall within the purview of Act of 2007 keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481 and inspite of the aforesaid the respondent No. 2 has rejected the representation of the petitioner by an order dated 14/11/2019.
6. It has been further stated that an appeal was preferred under Section 10 of the Act of 2007 against order dated 14/11/2019 and the Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal by an order dated 10/01/2020. A review petition was also preferred in the matter and the Appellate Authority has dismissed the review petition by an order dated 06/03/2020.
7. The petitioner has challenged all the three orders passed in the matter and heavy reliance has been placed in the cases of Islamic Academy of Education and Another Vs. Sate of Karnataka and Others reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697 and Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited Vs. Ayodhya Prasad Mishra and Another reported in (2008) 10 SCC 139.
8. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has also argued before this Court that in the State of Uttarakhand, the law governing the field exempts Minority Institutions in the matter of fixation of fee i.e. Uttarakhand Unaided Private Professional Education Institution (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) (Amendment) Act, 2018 and similarly in Uttar Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006 is applicable to private aided and unaided professional Institutions except Minority Educational Institutions and therefore, in the State of Madhya Pradesh also the Minority Educational Institutions are excluded from the Act of 2007.
9. He has drawn the attention of this Court towards Section 8 of the Act of 2007 which provides for reservat
