{"id":237474,"date":"2020-10-15T11:41:42","date_gmt":"2020-10-15T06:11:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=237474"},"modified":"2023-10-03T15:00:14","modified_gmt":"2023-10-03T09:30:14","slug":"exhaustive-analysis-of-a-2-tier-mechanism-to-provide-concessions-in-school-fees-cal-hcs-ruling-to-unravel-various-aspects-to-reduction-of-tuition-fees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/15\/exhaustive-analysis-of-a-2-tier-mechanism-to-provide-concessions-in-school-fees-cal-hcs-ruling-to-unravel-various-aspects-to-reduction-of-tuition-fees\/","title":{"rendered":"Exhaustive analysis of a 2-tier mechanism to provide concession in school fees: Unraveling various aspects of Cal HC’s ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"

Calcutta High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>A Division Bench of Sanjib Banerjee and Moushumi Bhattacharya, JJ., while addressing the issues raised in the present petition observed that,<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

“From bringing to life the act-of-God clause that was mostly regarded as a redundant appendage in contracts to redefining the rules of human engagement, the pandemic has almost been all-pervasive.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The present lis is born in its wake: upon a unique situation arising where students have been kept away from academic institutions for months together, prompting their parents or guardians to question why regular fees ought to be paid in such a scenario.<\/span><\/p>\n

PRIVATE UNAIDED SCHOOLS | Concession in Fees<\/span><\/p>\n

The point of public interest canvassed in the petitions is that private unaided schools should allow the substantial concession in fees as the physical conduct of classes has not been possible for more than 6 months and normal functioning may not resume in a full-fledged manner for several months more.<\/p>\n

Profiteering by Schools<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

The parents or guardians complain of profiteering by the schools by unjustly enriching themselves even as several of the schools have terminated the services of several of the usual employees or have not paid the teachers in full and not incurred the normal expenses needed to physically operate such schools.<\/p>\n

School’s Contention\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Almost all the schools represented contended that they have not removed any regular employee from the payrolls, and some even claim that the contractual staff have also been retained and paid during the lockdown.<\/p>\n

Institutions controlled by the Church<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

The institutions controlled by the Church of North India and another which claims to be a linguistic minority educational institution, have objected to the Court seeking to interfere into their affairs.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

They suggest that not only do they enjoy a special status accorded by Article 30(1) of the Constitution but they are also protected under Article 19 of the suprema lex.<\/p>\n

No drastic measure<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

By and large, the schools indicate that they have not taken the ultimate drastic measure of excluding students from the limited online classes now conducted, though no fees may have been tendered on behalf of several students for the period beginning April, 2020.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

The general refrain is that schools do not look at making any profit and, to the extent, their financial positions may allow, they are ready to accord concessions to parents or guardians of students in financial distress, but a general reduction of fees across the board should not be permitted.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

“…courts must exercise extreme self-restraint and not use the extensive amplitude as a springboard for judicial anarchy.”<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n
\n

In a breakdown scenario as a result of any natural calamity or an act of God or when the subordinate judiciary is not available or a litigant has no access to any other court in an extreme case, the High Court must not forget the width of the authority available to it and its constitutional obligation to discharge its duties governed by the overarching established principles designed by what may be loosely said to be the rule of law.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Two other broadheads of objection have been taken by some of the schools as noticed above: under Article 30(1) of the Constitution and under Article 19 thereof read with the right of privacy as espoused.<\/em><\/p>\n

Court while analysing the set of contentions with regard t minority institutions stated that,<\/p>\n

\n

“…even minority educational institutions need to adhere to certain fundamental norms, the most basic of them being that they cannot be run for the purpose of making profit”.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Bench added that the basic requirement is that the fees charged must have some correlation with the facilities provided.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

If the facilities provided over a long stretch of time, as for the best part of a year and probably more, cost less because physical classes have not been held, a substantial part of the money saved has to be returned without, for the moment, going to the question as to whether it should be returned pro rata or on a need-based basis.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Assessment of fees<\/span><\/p>\n

Hence, Court stated that an assessment of the fees demanded or obtained during the lockdown period and in the absence of physical classes in the schools, may not amount to the breach of any right conferred by Article 30(1) of the Constitution in respect of a school run by a religious or a linguistic minority.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

The same rule as above should apply to all private unaided schools since they are governed by private contracts between private individuals.<\/p>\n

Bench in view of the unprecedented situation and as a one time measure issued the following directions:<\/p>\n