The High Court of Uttarakhand has directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Uttarakhand to file their response within one week on a petition challenging the hike in fees for filing complaints before the State Bar Council against lawyers.

The Bench of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rakesh Thapliyal passed the order on Monday on a petition, which alleged that the Bar Council of Uttarakhand had raised the fees for filing complaint against an Advocate to Rs 5,500 and only after payment, can the concerned complaint be considered for disciplinary enquiry against the lawyer concerned.

Advocate Kartikey Hari Gupta, representing the petitioner, argued that as per the Bar Council of India Rules, only a maximum of Rs 450 could be levied to lodge a complaint for disciplinary action against an advocate. 

Terming the Bar Council of Uttarakhand’s decision to fix the amount at Rs 5,5000 as illegal, the petitioner contended that because of such high fees, even genuine complainants were not able to initiate a complaint against a lawyer’s misconduct.

The Bench posted the matter for next hearing on June 13.

(Case title: Satya Devi Tyagi vs State)

The Delhi High Court observed that “multifariousness of petitions is not permissible” while disposing of a plea challenging a notification issued by Delhi’s Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University pertaining to retrospective fee hike amid the Covid-19 pandemic.

The development came after the Division Bench led by Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh was informed that a petition involving similar issues is pending before a single-judge bench. The Bench observed: “Multifariousness of petitions are not permissible. If for the very same issues involved in this writ petition, already another writ is pending, we see no reason to entertain the present writ petition.”

The Bench, thereby, disposed of the instant petition, while reserving liberty with the petitioner to move an impleadment application before the single judge in the pending writ petition.

The petition has been filed by lawyer and social activist Varun Katiyar alleging that the notification dated September 7, 2020, whereby the University has raised the fees of 21 unaided educational institutions affiliated to it, is disproportionate, arbitrary and unreasonable.

The plea states that while the entire nation is facing the financial hardship on account of the global pandemic, the University raises its fees retrospectively in a disproportionate, arbitrary and unreasonable manner.

It further states that the fees has been increased despite the fact that there neither have been any on-campus classroom sessions in any of the institutions since last one year nor have the students availed any services at these institutions, including library or conference facilities.

The plea points out that the fees has been raised despite a letter issued by the University Grant Commission on May 27, 2020, requesting the educational institutions to be sympathetic with students on payment of fees. A similar circular, to all the centres of legal education in the nation, was issued by the Bar Council of India on July 27, 2020.

The plea further points out that a representation was made by the Association of Indian Students, a voluntary student organisation run by the petitioner, before the Vice Chancellor of the University on November 4, 2020, requesting him to take appropriate action against the notification.

In light of the above, the plea seeks declaration of the notification to be illegal and thereby, null and void. In addition, the plea seeks restraining the University from taking coercive actions against students failing to pay the fees in lieu of the notification. Furthermore, the plea prays for directing the University to not charge academic fee with retrospective effect from students and refund the fee to those students who have already paid the same.

“The educational institutions are social welfare institutions whose motive is to do social welfare and not aim at making profits,” reads the plea.

The plea adds that the retrospective fee hike by the University curtails the access of students to quality education and depicts that the University is working for profit motive rather than for departing quality education.

The Supreme Court on Friday has dismissed the petition seeking directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh to discharge its constitutional obligation by providing a rebate in the fees charged by the Un-aided Pvt. School across the State of Uttar Pradesh and more particularly in the district of Gautam Budh Nagar, UP.

A three-judge bench headed by Justices Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah heard the matter through video-conferencing. 

Justice Bhushan said “Your prayer is very vague. We cannot pass orders on such a case.”

Justice Shah said- it depends on the decision of the government and school to school. 

Petitioner submitted that Something must be done on the aspect of continuous education of children since the exams are posted in February.

The bench said he may make a representation or approach the high court for interim relief.

The bench Dismissed the petition with the liberty to approach the HC.

The petition was filed by Animesh Khanna. He had submitted that the states of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana and Delhi amongst others have provided reduction in fees of varying proportion in their respective States and Union Territory to achieve the balance in the society where children and parents are not buckled under pressure from an un-aided private Schools in their pursuant of illegal profiteering during the unprecedented health crises due to the COVID-19/Pandemic.

Read Also: Big Tech: The New Superpower

Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi has issued Order directing Private Schools to not to charge any fee component other than tuition fees till the opening of the institution in view of the Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic and subsequent Nationwide Lockdown. 

Delhi Government has to act after some schools have increased the fee in the academic session 2020-21 without taking cognizance of the prevailing situations in view of the announcement of lockdown by the Central Government and despite the enforcement of Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the Delhi Epidemic Diseases, COVID-19 Regulations, 2020 under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 for prevention and containment of COVID-19 and also without compliance of the mandatory provision of Sections 17 (3) of Delhi School Education Act 1973 and several other guidelines issued by the Department from time to time in this regard. 

“Some Schools have increased the fee without seeking approval of Director (Education) even though they are running on the land allotted by the DDA/Other Land Owing Agencies with such condition…,” it said. 

Delhi Government said, that charging of fees from the students under the New heads is in violation of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as the directions of the Directorate of Education. 

 “…whereas, it has also been learnt that some private schools have started providing online learning material/ classes to the students of their respective schools for the academic session 2020-2021 so as to cover the learning / curricular activities of this academic session. This is a welcome step in the interest of students. However, it is a matter of grave concern that some schools are found indulging in the malpractices which are inhuman, especially in view of the outbreak of Corona Virus (COVID-19),” said Delhi Government. 

Directorate of Education, Delhi Government being conferred with responsibilities under Section 39 (i) of Disaster Management Act, 2005 in exercise of powers under Section 17(3) of DSEA,1973 read with Rule 43, DSEAR, 1973 today directed all Heads/Managers of the private unaided schools of Delhi:- 

• To not charge any fees, except tuition fee from the parents till further orders.
• Heads of the schools should not demand and collect tuition fee from parents/students on quarterly basis. The fee has to be collected only on monthly basis.
• In the academic session 2020-2021,  fee is not to be increased till further directions irrespective of the fact whether school is running on private land or  the land is owned by DDA/ other Government land owning agencies.
• School running on land allotted by DDA / other land owning agencies with condition to seek approval of Director(Education) before any fee increase, shall collect tuition fee on basis of last fee structure approved by Director(Education) or as per fee statement filed by them for Session 2015-16
• Heads of Schools shall ensure to provide access of Online education/materials/ classes to all students without any discrimination by providing them ID/ Password to get them online education  facility 
• Heads of schools in any case shall not deny ID and password to those students/ parents for getting online access of educational facilities who are unable to pay school fees due to financial crisis arising out of closure of business activities in the lockdown condition.
• Heads of schools shall not create any extra burden by creating new head of fee.
• Payment of monthly salary shall not be stopped and existing total emoluments to teaching and non-teaching staff of schools shall not be reduced in name of non-availability of funds and in case of shortfalls, be obtained from Society/Trust running the school. 

Violation of above directions shall invoke penal action under DSEAR, 1973 and IPC and also under Section 51(b), Disaster Management Act, 2005 which provides that, without reasonable cause,

“Refusal to comply with any direction given by or on behalf of Central or State Government or National Executive Committee or State Executive Committee or District Authority under this Act, shall on conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or fine, or both and if such obstruction or refusal to comply with directions, results in loss of lives or imminent danger, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years”

Above directions came in wake of incidents of private schools charging fees from students under new heads, not providing of ID/Password of online classes to students who could not pay illegally increased fees due to financial crunch, demanding and collecting of fee from parents on quarterly basis and private schools not paying salary to teaching and non-teaching staff or paying lesser salary.

-India Legal Bureau

The Jawaharlal Nehru Students’ Union (JNUSU) on Monday will be a filing a petition in Delhi High Court for reversing an order against the new Inter Hostel Manual (IHA) which sets provisions for fee hike.

The petition will also seek registration of the students at old rates of fee without any late fines.

In a statement, the students’ body said that the new IHA manual clearly violates the JNU Act 1966 and that the manual was passed illegally.

The Student’s Union also appealed the students to boycott exams and classes till they get “buffer time” to complete the academic backlog of the Monsoon Semester 2019.

“Furthermore, taking exams and/or classes at this juncture will only create more chaos and ruckus and lead to another bifurcation in the student community that has been resolutely and unitedly fighting tooth and nail against this draconian VC and his political masters,” the statement read.

The students of JNU have been protesting since October last year against the fee hike which proposes a 300% increase in the hostel fee and introduces various other charges under new heads.

Earlier this month, JNU Students’ Union President Aishe Ghosh had met officials of Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) to restore academic normalcy in the university. Amit Khare, Secretary (Additional Charge), MHRD had assured JNU Students’ Union President Aishe Ghosh about ministry’s intervention in the matter and had said that the University Grants Commission (UGC) will take care of the service and utility charges.