HC: With schools working normally, parents must resume fee payment

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, February 25

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asserted that parents are expected to resume payment of tuition fee, as they did in pre-Covid days, with the schools resorting to normal functioning and the classes taking place.

“I am of the view that once the schools have now resumed to normal functioning and the classes are taking place, it is expected of the petitioner, who is the parent of a ward, to resume payment of tuition fee, as was being done during pre-Covid time. However, the question with regard to charges to be paid during Covid period is left open to be decided by the competent authority,” Justice Arun Monga asserted.

Advertisement

The assertion came on a petition filed by a minor-student through his father against the state of Haryana and other respondents. He was seeking directions for restraining the respondents from taking “any measure to deny the facility of online/offline classes”. Directions were also sought to further restrain the respondents from taking “coercive measures so as to collect the amount of revision of fee in excess of 10 per cent of the fee charged during the session 2020-21”.

Appearing before the Bench, the father argued that the school had unreasonably revised the fee for session 2021-22. He further contended that the classes for the first six months were held online during session 2020-21. The classes were being held offline on alternate days only after October 1, 2021. As such, the school should not hike the fee.

After hearing rival contentions, Justice Monga asserted he was of the opinion that a similar controversy had already been decided in September last year by a coordinate Bench of the High Court while hearing a civil writ petition.

Justice Monga also reproduced the operative part of the last year’s order, which said the petitioners’ counsel could not refer to relevant rule in the Haryana School Education Rules, 2003, under which Haryana Director-General, Secondary, could take action against the respondent-school on the allegations of charging excess fee.

The Bench had added that a “Fee and Fund Regulatory Committee” was provided for entertaining complaints regarding charging of excess fee. It was statutorily required to complete its proceedings within 60 days from receiving the complaint and issue necessary directions in case of overcharging.

It could also recommend withdrawal of the school’s recognition/affiliation. The Bench had concluded that directions could not be issued in the writ petition, but the petitioners would have liberty to approach the committee for necessary relief if advised.

“The instant writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek his remedy in accordance with view taken by this court,” Justice Monga concluded.