Back
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), (Deemed to be University) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek enforcement of fee structure. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners argue break fee is unlawful. (Para 4) |
| 3. university claims break fee for extra classes. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court assesses university's fee justification. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. regulatory structure prohibits excessive fees. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. education should not be a commercial venture. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. court orders cessation of additional fees and refunds. (Para 20) |
| 8. writ petitions are allowed; conclusion reached. (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
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
