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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 617

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
STANES SCHOOL ICSE-ISC PARENTS ASSOCIATION (SIPA) – Appellant
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY NCPCR – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

and

W.M.P.Nos.13910, 13911 and 13912 of 2025

Stanes School ICSE-ISC Parents

Association (SIPA),

Represented by its Secretary,

Mr.Stephen Roy A,

No.3D Kandhavel Foundry Compound,

Kasthuribai Street, Ganapathy,

Coimbatore 641 006.

Petitioner

Vs

1. The Principal Private Secretary, NCPCR,

National Commission for Protection of Child Rights,

5th Floor, Chanderlok Building, 36 Janpath,

New Delhi-110 001.

2.The Chief Executive and Secretary,

Council for ICSE,

Pragati House 3rd Floor,

47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110 019.

3.The Principal Secretary, Tamil Nadu Government,

School Education, St George Fort,

Chennai 600 009.

4.The Special Officer,

Tamil Nadu Private Schools Fees Determination

Committee, Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kavil Vazhagam,

Nungambakkam, Chennai.

5.The Director of Private Schools, School Education Department, Mgr Building, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600006.

6.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Parents Teachers Association , Director of School Education Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600006.

7.The District Collector Collectrate Campus, Coimbatore 641018.

8.The Chief Educational Officer No.500, Chief Educational Office, Raja Street, Near Five Corner, Coimbatore 641001.

9.The District Education Officer (Private School)

Ondipudur, Coimbatore 641016.

10.The Correspondent Stanes School ICSE-ISC, Coimbatore 641018.

Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 4th respondent/Committee dated 13.01.2025 and quash the same as arbitrary in nature consequently directing the 4th respondent/Committee to determine the fees structure together with a direction to the 11th respondent/School to continue a Parent Teacher Association in accordance with Rule 41 of Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules

2023, For Petitioner :Mr.A.Parthasarathy For Respondents :M/s A.M.Ayyadurai, GA for R3 to R9

ORDER

The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent/Committee dated 13.01.2025 and to quash the same and consequently, direct the 4th respondent/Committee to determine the fees structure together with a direction to the 11th respondent/School to constitute a Parent Teacher Association in accordance with Rule 41 of the Tamil Nadu Private School (Regulation) Rules 2023.

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner/Parents of the children, who are admitted into the 10th respondent/ School is that the school goes on increasing the fees every year including 100% fee increase. Earlier, the details are compiled by the Fee Committee itself and it could be seen that the fee, which was Rs.65,000/- in the year 2019-2020 had become Rs.1,00,000/- in the year 2024-2025 and the fee, which was Rs.75,000/- in the year 2019-2020 had become Rs.1,55,000/- even more than 100%. When this was brought to the notice of the 4th respondent/Committee, the 4th respondent/Committee ought to have taken appropriate action against the 10th respondent/School. However, they had passed the impugned order and therefore, the petitioners are before this Court.

3. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the matter is still pending before the Honourable Supreme Court of India and an interim order is in force in favour of the 10th respondent/School and as such, within the powers the 4th respondent/Committee had passed the orders. In reply thereof, the learned counsel for the petitioner submit that not even a detailed inspection has been carried out.

4. I considered the rival submissions made and perused the materials records of the case.

5. The State of Tamil Nadu had passed the Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of Fee), Act, 2009 (in short “the Act”) under which the private schools are not entitled to fix the fe

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