SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67176

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J
R.K.Sarathkumaran – Appellant
Versus
The Chairman, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education (CARE) – Respondent
W.P.No.39756 of 2024 & others



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. T.Gowthaman, Senior Counsel For Mr.R.Swarnavel
For the Respondents: Mr.M.S.Krishnan, Senior Counsel, For Mr.T.Balaji
For R7: Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Special Panel Counsel
For R8: Mrs.V.Sudha Special Panel Counsel

Educational institutions must adhere strictly to prescribed fee structures, prohibiting any unauthorized fee collection.

Headnote:(A) University Grants Commission (Institution deemed to be universities) Act, 1956 - Section 24 - Regulations 2023 - Demand for additional tuition fee termed as 'Break Fee' challenged - Court directed the University not to collect fees outside the prescribed structure - Highlights that educational institutions must adhere to regulatory fee frameworks, prohibiting unauthorized fees. (Paras 20-21)

(B) Education - Concept of education as a noble service versus commercial venture - Emphasis on moral responsibilities of educational institutions to provide equitable access and adhere to described fees. (Para 19)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners joined the MBBS course at CARE University, faced demand for unforeseen break fees, allegedly blocking their internship, and withholding certificates due to non-payment.

Findings of Court:
CARE University barred from charging extra fees for supplementary classes not mandated by regulations, with an order for refund of illegally collect fees.

Issues: Clarity on capitation fee prohibitions and universities' adherence to fee regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: Court reaffirmed that educational institutions cannot arbitrarily demand fees beyond the sanctioned framework and must act within the regulatory guidelines.

Result: Writ Petitions allowed, with directives for compliance and issuance of certificates.

Table of Content
1. scope of petitioners' claims regarding the break fee. (Para 3)
2. arguments presented by petitioners against illegal fees. (Para 4 , 5)
3. judicial observations on educational fee regulation. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 14)
4. court's directive against unauthorized fee collection. (Para 20)
5. closure of the case with directions for compliance. (Para 21)

COMMON ORDER

All the Writ Petitions have been filed to direct the respondents to implement the fee structure prescribed by the Fee Fixation Committee and to direct the respondents/College not to charge additional tuition fee in the form of Break Fee/miscellaneous fee and to release the original educational certificate to all the petitioners to pursue their further career.

2. The issues involved in all these Writ Petitions are similar in nature and therefore this Court is inclined to pass a common order.

3. All the petitioners had joined in the Chettinad Academy of Research and Education (Deemed to be University) (hereinafter referred to as “the CARE University”) in the academic year 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 in the MBBS course under the management quota. They passed all the examinations conducted by the CARE University in nine semesters. Though they had arrears in some papers, they subsequently cleared all the papers in the following academic years. However, all the petitioners have to complete their internship to get their MBBS degree certificate. Though the petitioners had written supplementary examinations and passed all the examinations, they did not undergo any extra classes. Till the beginning of their internship, the CARE University did not speak about the break fee. All of a sudden, they had asked the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per subject per arrear exam, in addition to Rs.35,000/- as exam fee. Further the petitioners were served with a calculation memo and a demand notice to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- per arrear paper. They had also received E-mail from the CARE University to remit the break fee within a stipulated time. Though the petitioners approached the CARE University and sought for explanation for the demand, the petitioners were not explained in respect of the demand. Once again, the petitioners were informed by a reminder to pay the break fee. Since the petitioners did not pay the break fee, the CARE University blocked the petitioners' access from entering into the college and face identity access was also denied. Face identity entry is mandatory for claiming stipend. Further the CARE University also informed the concerned departments not to permit the petitioners to attend internships without payment of break fee. The petitioners were not provided with P1 provisional certificates because of the non payment of break fee. Hence, the present Writ Petitions.

4. Mr.T.Gowthaman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the demand of break fee is arbitrary and without jurisdiction. They cannot collect excess fee apart from the fee fixed by the Fee Fixation Committee. The University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as “the UGC”) and the National Medical Council regulate the fee structure for all the deemed to be universities including the CARE University. As per the University Grants Commission (Institution deemed to be universities) Regulations, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as UGC Regulations, the deemed to be universities have to frame fee structure as per the fee fixed by the Government or by the Commission on this behalf from time to time. As per Section 3 of the University Grants Commission (Institution deemed to be universities) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “UGC Act”), the CARE University is amenable to all the stipulations of UGC Act including its fee structure.

4.1. By virtue of Government order in G.O.Ms.No.226, Higher Education (J2) Department, dated 11.07.2007, a committee was constituted for fixation of fee for the deemed to be universities under the chairmanship of a retired Judge of this Co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top