Madras High Court Orders Notice on PIL Seeking Regulation of Fees in Aided Schools
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking a comprehensive inquiry into the alleged collection of excess fees by government-aided schools.
A division bench comprising Justices N. Sathish Kumar and M. Jothiraman ordered the notice while hearing the petition filed by Brother M. Michael Thangaraja from Uthamapalayam in Theni district.
The petitioner alleged that the managements of three aided schools—located in Theni, Ramanathapuram, and Tiruvannamalai districts—had been collecting fees beyond the permissible limits despite the state government's order waiving special fees for students in government and aided institutions.
According to the petitioner, such unauthorised collection of fees by aided institutions, which receive financial support from the government, is “contrary to public policy, constitutional morality, and educational justice.” The PIL underscored that education authorities are legally obligated to supervise schools and prevent the exploitation of students. It contended that the failure to act constitutes an abdication of statutory and constitutional duties.
The petition also cited the Supreme Court's repeated observations that education is not a commercial commodity and that educational institutions must not engage in profiteering.
Brother Thangaraja sought multiple directions from the court: firstly, to restrain the schools from collecting any amount exceeding the fees prescribed under relevant government orders and regulations; secondly, to direct the authorities to identify, quantify, and recover the excess amounts unlawfully collected and ensure their prompt refund to affected students and parents; and thirdly, to initiate appropriate proceedings against those responsible for such unlawful acts.
Furthermore, the PIL requested the court to direct the government to establish a transparent and accountable mechanism for strictly monitoring and regulating fee collection in all aided educational institutions across Tamil Nadu.
After hearing the initial submissions, the bench ordered notice to the state government and scheduled the next hearing for July 15.
The case brings to focus the broader issue of fee regulation in government-aided schools. In Tamil Nadu, aided schools receive substantial grants from the state, covering teaching and non-teaching staff salaries, while the schools are expected to adhere strictly to fee structures set by the government. However, complaints of unauthorised fee collection have surfaced periodically, leading to concerns about accessibility and equity in education.
Legal experts note that the right to education is intrinsically linked to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. Excessive fees can impede this right, particularly for students from economically weaker sections. The Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment in Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka (2003), held that educational institutions cannot charge capitation fees or indulge in profiteering, and that a reasonable surplus for development is permissible but not commercialisation.
The Madras High Court has previously dealt with similar matters, emphasising the need for strict compliance with fee regulations. This PIL seeks to not only address the immediate grievances of affected students but also to institute a permanent oversight framework. The court's eventual ruling could have significant implications for the management of aided schools and the enforcement of fee norms.
As the matter stands, the state government is expected to file its response before the next hearing, addressing the allegations and outlining the existing measures to prevent fee exploitation. The court will then examine whether further judicial intervention is required to safeguard the interests of students.
