High Court · 2025

b) I ssue a writ , order or direct ion in t he nat ure of Cert iorar i t wo m em bers of t he Appellat e Aut horit y as ult ra vires t he Const it ut ion and against t he let t er and spir it of t he j udgem ent s of t he Honourable High Court . t he decision t aken by direct ing c) I ssue a writ , order or direct ion in t he nat ure of Mandam us educat ional t he inst it ut ions t o charge fee as last duly approved by t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee at Rs. 80,500/ - from t he educat ional t hese inst it ut ions.” st udent s privat e privat e 2

4. Pet it ioners in Writ Pet it ion ( M/ S) No. 513 of 2020 t ook adm ission in Doon I nst it ut e of Medical Sciences, Sahaspur, Dist rict Dehradun in t he Academ ic Session 2017- 2018; in fact , pet it ioners were in t he first bat ch of st udent s, as t he said college st art ed in t he sam e year. Pursuant t o j udgm ent rendered by Hon’ble Suprem e Court in t he case of I slam ic Academ y of Educat ion and anot her v. St at e of Karnat ak and ot hers, ( 2003) 6 SCC 697, St at e Legislat ure enact ed t he Ut t arakhand Unaided Privat e Professional Educat ional I nst it ut ions ( Regulat ion of Adm ission and Fixat ion of Fee) Act , 2006 ( hereinaft er referred t o as ‘Act ’) . The said Act applies t o all Unaided Privat e Professional Educat ional I nst it ut ions. Sect ion 4 of t he said Act provides for a Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee. Sect ion 4( 12) of t he said Act ordains t hat t he com m it t ee shall det erm ine t he fee for adm ission t o Privat e Professional Educat ional I nst it ut ions.

5. A conj oint reading of sub- sect ions ( 12) ( 13) & ( 14) of Sect ion of 4 of t he Act would reveal t hat every privat e inst it ut ion is under t he dut y t o place before t he com m it t ee t he proposed fee st ruct ure before com m encem ent of an academ ic year, wit h all relevant docum ent s and books of account s, for det erm inat ion of fee. Sub- sect ion ( 14) , however, provides t hat fee once det erm ined, shall be applicable for a period of t hree years, and upon expiry of t hree years, t he inst it ut ion would be at libert y t o apply for revision of fee, however, t here is a rider in sub- sect ion ( 14) t hat fee det erm ined, shall be applicable t o a st udent , who t akes 3 adm ission in t hat academ ic year and t he fee, which was applicable at t he t im e of adm ission of a st udent shall not be revised t ill com plet ion of his / her course of st udy. Sub- sect ions ( 12) ( 13) & ( 14) of Sect ion of 4 of t he Act are ext ract ed below for ready reference: - “ ( 12) The Com m it t ee shall det erm ine t he fees for adm ission privat e inst it ut ions. professional courses t o ( 13) Before t he com m encem ent of t he academ ic year, it shall be com pulsory for every privat e inst it ut ion t o place before t he com m it t ee t he proposed fee st ruct ure of professional courses wit h all relevant docum ent s and books of account s for det erm inat ion of fees. t he The com m it t ee aft er considering all docum ent s placed before it , shall det erm ine t he fee wit hin one m ont h m axim um . I n case t he proposal for fixat ion of fee for professional courses t he com m it t ee, t he privat e inst it ut ion shall not run t he course. Therefore t he privat e inst it ut ion shall not give adm ission in such course. is not placed before ( 14) The fee det erm ined by t he com m it t ee shall be applicable on t he privat e inst it ut ion for a period of t hree years. Aft er t he expiry of t he period of t hree years, t he inst it ut ion would be at libert y t o apply for revision. The fee so det erm ined shall be applicable t o a candidat e who is adm it t ed t o an inst it ut ion in t hat academ ic year and t hat fees shall not be revised t ill t he com plet ion of his/ her course in t he said privat e inst it ut ion.”

6. Sect ion 12 of t he aforesaid Act provides for an Appellat e Aut horit y, which shall hear appeals against t he order of Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee. According t o t he pet it ioners, t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee had last det erm ined t he fee in t he year 2007, and t hereaft er, t he quest ion of fee det erm inat ion was never t aken t o t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee. Thus, it is cont ended on behalf of t he pet it ioners t hat in view of t he det erm inat ion m ade by t he Com m it t ee in 2007, t hey were liable t o pay ₹80,500/ - as fee. I t is furt her 4 cont ended t hat t he fee det erm ined in 2007 was in respect of all Ayurvedic Colleges wit hin Ut t arakhand.

7. According t o t he pet it ioners, on t he request of Ayurvedic Colleges, St at e Governm ent issued a Governm ent Order dat ed 14.10.2015, whereby t he t uit ion fee payable by st udent s of B.A.M.S. Course in different Ayurvedic Colleges was increased ₹80,500/ - to ₹2,15,000/- wit hout reference t o t he Fee Regulat or Com m it t ee const it ut ed under Sect ion 4 of t he aforesaid Act . I t is cont ended t hat St at e Governm ent could not unilat erally have ordered upward revision of fee by t he said Governm ent Order. The said Governm ent Order was challenged before t his Court and by a j udgm ent dat ed 09.07.2018 rendered in Writ Pet it ion ( M/ S) No. 1849 of 2017 and ot her connect ed pet it ions, t he said order was set aside.

8. I t is cont ended t hat despit e t he said j udgm ent , st udent s of Ayurvedic Colleges were illegally made to pay ₹2,15,000/- as t uit ion fee, wit hout placing t he m at t er before t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee. Thus, it is cont ended t hat t he act of t he colleges of charging fee in excess and t he fee det erm ined by Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee is illegal and is liable t o be refunded t o t he st udent s.

9. I n t his writ pet it ion, pet it ioners have challenged t he order dat ed 31.01.2020 passed by t he Appellat e Aut horit y. By t he said order, t he decision t aken by Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee in it s m eet ing held on 29.04.2019 was m ade applicable t o t he st udent s of 5 Academ ic Session 2017- 18. I t is cont ended on behalf of t he pet it ioners t hat t he enhanced fee, as det erm ined by t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee can be m ade applicable only prospect ively and t he st udent s, who t ook adm ission in preceding years cannot be asked t o pay t he enhanced fee, as was det erm ined in subsequent years. I t is furt her cont ended t hat from t he m inut es of t he m eet ing of t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee held on

29.04.2019 ( Annexure- 2 t o t he writ pet it ion) , it is revealed t hat t he fee det erm ined by t he Com m it t ee in t he said m eet ing was only provisional and not final, t herefore, such provisional fee could not have been m ade applicable, wit h ret rospect ive effect by t he Appellat e Aut horit y. I n support of t he cont ent ion t hat fee det erm ined by t he com m it t ee was only provisional, learned counsel for t he pet it ioners has drawn at t ent ion t his Court t o Annexure- 2 t o t he writ pet it ion, relevant ext ract whereof is ext ract ed below: - “ Aft er hearing all concerned including Pr esident of t he Associat ion, Direct or Ayush, Secret ary Ayush and Chart ered Account ant , t he Com m it t ee unanim ously decided t o fix int er im fee for sessions 2019- 20, 2020- 21 and 2021- 22 as follows: - a) BAMS - Rs. 2.15 lac per annum b) BHMS - Rs. 1.10 lac per annum c) MD/ MS ( Ayurved) - Rs. 3.15 lac per annum The inst it ut ions will inform t he above fees in writ ing t o t he st udent s along wit h t he r ider t hat if t he final fees fixed by t he com m it t ee is less, t he difference will be refunded t o t hem and if it is m ore t he difference will be charged from t hem addit ionally. t hat proposals This is being done as an int er im arrangem ent as t he academ ic session is due t o st art very soon. Moreover, it has been brought t o t he not ice of t he com m it t ee t he inst it ut ions are not com plet e respect s. Associat ion is direct ed t o get t he short com ings in t he proposals rect ified by t he concerned individual inst it ut ions and get t he proposals subm it t ed t o Direct or Ayush w it hin a week. received in all 6 subcom m it t ee earlier The com prising of Direct or Ayush, Chart ered Account ant and subj ect specialist will exam ine t he above proposals and subm it t heir recom m endat ions t o t he com m it t ee at t he ear liest . Put up on 13 May, 2019.” const it ut ed

10. Learned counsel for t he pet it ioners subm it s t hat t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee had det erm ined t he int erim fee for Academ ic Sessions 2019- 20, 2020- 21 and 2021- 22 as per provision cont ained in Sect ion 4( 14) of t he aforesaid Act , however, t he Appellat e Aut horit y illegally t ook a decision t o m ake t he revised fee applicable, even t o st udent s of Academ ic Sessions 2017- 18 and 2018- 19. Thus, it is cont ended t hat t he Appellat e Aut horit y’s order dat ed 31.01.2020 is liable t o be set aside t o t he aforesaid ext ent .

11. At t ent ion of t his Court is also drawn t o t he provision cont ained in Sect ion 5( 2) of t he aforesaid Act , which provides t hat no professional educat ional inst it ut ion shall collect any fee over and above t he fee det erm ined by t he Com m it t ee. I t is cont ended t hat t he fee det erm ined by t he Com m it t ee was for Academ ic Sessions 2019- 20, 2020- 21 and 2021- 22, t herefore, t he decision t o apply t he said fee det erm inat ion, t o earlier academ ic years, is unsust ainable.

12. Learned counsel for respondent s, however, support ed t he order passed by Appellat e Aut horit y on

31.01.2020 and subm it t ed t hat since fee st ruct ure of Ayurvedic Colleges was not revised for a considerable t im e and t he colleges concerned were facing it difficult t o m eet t he expendit ure, t herefore, on t he prayer of t he concerned colleges, Appellat e Aut horit y right ly 7 decided t o apply t he revised Academ ic Session 2017- 18. fee st ruct ure

13. I t is not in disput e t hat aft er enforcem ent of t he Act , decision regarding fee st ruct ure of an aided privat e professional educat ional inst it ut ion has t o be t aken by t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee alone and neit her t he m anagem ent of t he college nor t he St at e Governm ent can decide t he fee st ruct ure unilat erally. I t is not in disput e t hat aft er t he fee det erm ined by t he com m it t ee t he year 2007, t he Fee Regulat ory Com m it t ee det erm ined t he fee st ruct ure of Ayurvedic Colleges on 29.04.2019 and in bet ween, t here was no fee det erm inat ion by t he com m it t ee. I n view of provision cont ained in Sect ion 5( 2) of t he aforesaid Act , Ayurvedic Colleges concerned could not have charged t he fee over and above t he am ount det erm ined by t he com m it t ee.

14. I n t hese writ pet it ions, pet it ioners have quest ioned t he aut horit y of t he Appellat e Body t o apply t he fee det erm inat ion m ade by t he com m it t ee t o such st udent s, who t ook adm ission in preceding years. I t is cont ended t hat fee det erm inat ion can be applied only prospect ively and st udent s who t ook adm ission previous academ ic years cannot be asked t o pay t he enhanced fee det erm ined by t he com m it t ee subsequent years.

15. This Court finds subst ance t he said subm ission. I n view of provision cont ained in sub- sect ions ( 12) , ( 13) and ( 14) of Sect ion 4 of t he 8 aforesaid Act , t he t uit ion fee payable by st udent s of a privat e unaided professional college can be revised only as per det erm inat ion m ade by t he com m it t ee; every college, before com m encem ent of academ ic session, will have t o require before t he com m it t ee, t he proposed fee st ruct ure and t he fee det erm ined by t he com m it t ee, shall be applicable for a period of t hree years and aft er expiry of t hree years, t he college would be at libert y t o for revision. I t furt her revealed t hat det erm ined by t he com m it t ee shall be applicable t o a st udent who t akes adm ission in t he sam e academ ic year in which t he fee det erm inat ion is m ade and t he fee payable by such st udent s shall not be revised t ill he / she com plet es t he course.

16. Thus, t he order passed by Appellat e Aut horit y is in t eet h of provision cont ained in Sect ion 4 ( 14) of t he Ut t arakhand Unaided Privat e Professional Educat ional I nst it ut ions ( Regulat ion of Adm ission and Fixat ion of Fee) Act , 2006, as such it is liable t o be quashed.

17. The writ pet it ions are allowed. The im pugned order dat ed 31.01.2020 ( Annexure- 1 t o t he writ pet it ion) , passed by Appellat e Aut horit y t o t he ext ent it perm it s upward revision t uit ion fee, wit h ret rospect ive effect t o st udent s who t ook adm ission during Academ ic Sessions 2017- 18 and 2018- 19 is quashed. I t is provided t hat fee det erm inat ion m ade by t he Regulat ory Com m it t ee it s m eet ing held on

29.04.2019 would be applicable only prospect ively. Subj ect t o paym ent of adm issible fee by t he 9 pet it ioners, Ayurvedic College concerned shall issue NOC t o t hem and t he Universit y shall t hereaft er release pet it ioners’ educat ional cert ificat es, wit hout any furt her delay. __________________________________ M A N OJ K UM A R TI W A RI , J. Dt : 8 h Januar y, 2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485 365445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D 454C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA6 6, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL 10