JUDGMENT

The petitioners in this case are the parents of students studying in the 4th respondent-Christ Nagar Public School, Thiruvananthapuram. In sum and substance, the pleadings on record by the petitioners are to the effect that, on account of the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions, their income has been drastically attenuated and therefore, that they are unable to shoulder the huge fees being charged by the school on their wards.

2. The petitioners assert that since the school is now not functioning physically, but only on virtual mode, the fees charged prior to the pandemic cannot be insisted from them because the facilities have been drastically reduced. They, therefore, pray that the school authorities be directed not to remove their children from the online classes for the reason of non-remittance of fees; and for a further direction to the school to grant them instalment facility to remit the tuition fee.

3. I have heard Sri.P.Anoop – learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri.R.S.Kalkura – learned counsel for the 4th respondent; Sri.S.Nirmal – learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 5 and Sri.P.M.Manoj – learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3.

4. The afore contentions of the petitioners were further supplemented by asserting that since the school is not functioning in the physical mode, heads of fees like 'Special Fee', 'Activity Fee', 'Establishment Fee', 'Magazine Fee', 'Celebration Fee' etc cannot be charged by them. He submitted that in the earlier years, the total fee was fixed factoring in all these heads; but that this is impermissible during the Covid-19 pandemic time, when the schools are remaining physically closed. He added that if these heads are now allowed to be charged, it will amount to profiteering at the hands of the school, which is expressly barred by the Affiliation By-Laws of the 2nd respondent-CBSE. He, therefore, reiteratingly prayed that the reliefs in this writ petition be granted.

5. In response, Sri.R.S.Kalkura – learned counsel appearing for the school, submitted that even without asking the petitioners, his client had offered reduction in the total fee, from what was charged in the academic year 2019-20, by 17% to 20%. He submitted that details of this reduction are enumerated in the affidavit dated 14.07.2021 filed by his client; further, adding that as and when parents had approached the Management seeking greater reduction, that was also granted, in some cases even up to 70%. He submitted that, in fact, the bonafides of the school was exhibited to all the parents when they issued Ext.R4(g) letter dated 11.12.2020, notifying them of the reduction in fees and requesting them to approach the Management if they require any further discount. He submitted that neither of the petitioners availed the benefit of Ext.R4(g) letter and that petitioners 1 and 2 paid full Tuition Fee, after availing the discount for the academic year 2020-2021; while they have paid a small portion for the academic year 2021-2022. He submitted that not only have they refused to make full payment for this academic year, they are encouraging other parents to follow suit and that this is now causing great strain on the financial resources of his client. He, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

6. The learned Standing Counsel for the CBSE – Sri.S.Nirmal, affirmed that the Affiliation By- laws of his client prohibit profiteering by any school and therefore, that unless they are able to establish that the fee being charged by them is commensurate to the facilities offered, they cannot be permitted to do so. He submitted that if this Court is so inclined, the CBSE can look into the issues in this case, however, adding that it does not appear to be necessary because, prima facie, the school is already offering 17% to 20%

discount across the classes.

7. I have evaluated the afore submissions and have also gone through the materials available on record.

8. As rightly stated by Sri.R.S.Kalkur