Introduction:

In a notable judgment, the Uttarakhand High Court upheld the State Government’s 2021 orders regulating the fees of private unaided residential schools during the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting them to tuition fees alone. The court dismissed the writ petition filed by Welham Boys’ School Society and others, who argued that such regulation infringed on the autonomy of private schools. Justices Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Pankaj Purohit emphasised that private educational institutions must operate in alignment with the public interest and underlined that profiteering in education, especially during emergencies, is impermissible.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioners, represented by Advocates Kanwaljeet Singh, Akshay Singh, and Anjali Rana, contended that the State Government lacked the legal authority to regulate the internal affairs of private educational institutions, particularly regarding fee structures. They argued that the government overstepped its jurisdiction by issuing orders that restricted schools to charge only tuition fees during the COVID-19 lockdown, especially when classes were conducted online. The petitioners claimed that the regulation undermined the autonomy of private institutions, which should have the right to decide on their fee structure and operational procedures.

On the other hand, the State, represented by Additional C.S.C. Mr P.C. Bisht justified its intervention under Article 162 of the Constitution, which grants the state executive powers to issue necessary directions in the public interest. The state emphasized that during the lockdown, when schools were closed, and students were receiving online education, services like hostel accommodations, catering, and other facilities were not being provided. Therefore, the charging of fees for such services was unjustified. The government argued that the intervention was in response to the exceptional circumstances of the pandemic and aimed to protect students and their families from being exploited by private schools.

Court’s Judgment:

The Uttarakhand High Court, after hearing both sides, ruled in favour of the State Government’s regulation. The court reiterated the importance of preventing commercialization and profiteering in education. The bench observed that the government was well within its rights to regulate the fees charged by private unaided schools, especially in times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic, where many services provided by the schools were suspended. The court emphasized that when educational institutions were not providing the services students were paying for, it was entirely reasonable for the state to step in and ensure that schools only charged for tuition fees.

In its judgment, the court cited previous judgments, including the T.M.A. Pai Foundation case, where the Supreme Court ruled that although educational institutions have the autonomy to fix their fees, commercialization in education is not permissible. It highlighted that the state had the duty to regulate the fees charged by educational institutions to prevent exploitation and profiteering. The court further affirmed that the government’s interference in this case was not only justified but necessary to maintain fairness during the pandemic.

The court also pointed to the government’s constitutional power under Article 162, which allows the executive to issue directions in the public interest. The judges concluded that the State’s orders did not infringe upon the autonomy of private schools but were instead aimed at protecting the interests of students and ensuring that no undue financial burden was imposed on them during a time of nationwide crisis. Thus, the petition was dismissed, and the state’s fee regulation was upheld.