Updated on: Sunday, August 14, 2011
The Delhi High Court set up a three-member committee headed by one of its former judges to scrutinise the accounts of various unaided private schools to determine the validity of the city government's February 2009 notification permitting them to hike their tuition fees.
The committre will be headed by former Chief Justice Anil Dev Singh of the Rajasthan High Court, also a former judge of the Delhi high court, said a bench of justices A K Sikri and Siddharth Mridul in its 134-page judgemment.
The committee will also consist of J S Kochar, a noted Charted Accountant, besides an educationist, to be nominated by the Delhi goverment's Chief Secretary.
Despite terming the government's notification dated February 11, 2009, allowing the unaided private schools to hike their fees, as "legal and valid", the bench held the notification was only an "interim measure", subject to its scrutiny.
"According to us, the only manner in which the order of February 11, 2009, is to be viewed, we are clear in mind that the increase in fees stipulated in the said order as ad-hoc measure is legal and valid," the bench said.
"However, as clarified above, we hasten to add that it would only be treated as an interim measure and would be subject to scrutiny into the records of each school to see whether there was any necessity to increase the fee having regard to the financial position of the said schools," it added.
Envisaging the scrutiny of school accounts by the panel formed by it, the bench said "we reiterate that the fee hike contained in the February 2009 order was by way of interim measure.
"There is a need to inspect and audit accounts of the schools to find out the funds to meet the increased obligation cast by the implementation of VIth Pay Commission and on this basis, to determine in respect of these schools as to how much hike in fee, if at all, is required."
The bench said that in case the panel set up by it finds the quantum of the fee, hiked by schools on the basis of the 2009 notification, to be higher than what was required fairly, the schools would be liable to return the surplus amount to the parents with an interest.
"On the basis of this exercise, if it is found that the increase in fee proposed, as per the notification, is more, the same shall be slided down and excess amount paid by the students shall be refunded along with interest at 9 per cent interest rate," the bench said.
The bench also made it clear that if a particular school is able to make out a case for higher fee hike, it would be allowed to recover from the students over and above what had been paid by them.
Authorising the committee to scrutinise the accounts of minority schools as well, the court said "such an order would be applicable to the minority schools as well and does not impinge upon their minority rights".
Expressing its annoyance over the failure of the Directorate of Education (DoE) and the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India in auditing the school accounts and resolving the issue, the court suggested the establishment of a permanent regulatory authority to decide the issues related to periodic hike of school fees.
"According to us, the solution lies in establishing a permanent regulatory body or mechanism. If a regulatory body is established either by appropriate amendments in the Delhi School Education Act or by making a separate legislation or by administrative orders issued under the existing provisions, if so permissible, that may solve the problem once and for all," the bench said.
The court said CAG audited the accounts of only 25 schools and that too "in a hurry and under pressure."
The court said had CAG audited the schools' accounts properly and extensively and had the government discharged its duty properly in addressing the issue of school fee hike, the court would have found no opportunity to suggest the creation of a regulatory body to delve into the issue of fees hike.
While suggesting to the city government the creation of a regulatory body for school fees hike, it asked the central government to consider framing a national policy on fees for unaided schools.