Background of the Government Order
During the COVID-19 pandemic, educational institutions worldwide faced unprecedented challenges, leading to a shift from traditional classroom teaching to online modes of instruction. In response, the Uttarakhand government issued an order in 2021 directing private unaided residential schools to charge only tuition fees during the lockdown period when classes were conducted online. This directive aimed to alleviate the financial burden on parents by ensuring they were not charged for services not utilized, such as hostel accommodation, mess facilities, and other ancillary services.
Petition by Welham Boys' School Society
Welham Boys' School Society, a prominent private residential school in Dehradun, filed a writ petition challenging the government's order. The petitioners contended that the state government lacked the authority to interfere in the internal financial matters of private unaided residential schools. They argued that the directive to charge only tuition fees infringed upon their autonomy and financial management, especially considering the maintenance costs of school infrastructure during the lockdown.
High Court's Rationale and Judgment
The division bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Justice Pankaj Purohit dismissed the petition, emphasizing that the state's intervention was justified under the emergent circumstances caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The court noted that during the lockdown, students were residing at home and did not avail themselves of services like hostel facilities, mess, and other amenities. Therefore, charging fees for these unutilized services would amount to unjust enrichment by the schools. The court stated, "Schools can charge Fee/charges only in lieu of services like Hostel, Catering, Laundry, etc., provided to the students. Without providing these services, School Management was not justified in demanding Fee for services, which are provided only when the School runs in physical mode and students reside in the hostel."
State's Authority Under Article 162
The court further elaborated on the state's executive powers under Article 162 of the Constitution, which allows the state to issue orders specific legislation, provided such orders do not contravene any constitutional provisions or existing laws. The bench observed that the state acted as a custodian of public welfare, intervening to prevent private residential schools from exploiting their dominant position to burden parents financially during a crisis. The court remarked, "The executive power of the State under Article 162 of the Constitution extends to framing policy and issuing necessary directions to private unaided residential schools in matters concerning public welfare, especially during unprecedented situations like a pandemic."
Implications for Private Educational Institutions
This judgment underscores the principle that education should not be commercialized or used for profiteering, especially durs. Private educational institutions are reminded of their social responsibility to act in the best interests of students and parents. The court's decision sets a precedent that, in extraordinary situations, the state can intervene to regulate fees and other practices of private schools to ensure fairness and prevent exploitation.
Conclusion
The Uttarakhand High Court's decision to uphold the government's order limiting fees during the COVID-19 lockdown reflects a balanced approach, considering both the financial constraints faced by parents and the operational challenges of private schools. By reinforcing the state's authority to act in public welfare during emergencies, the judgment ensures that the education sector remains equitable and just, even amidst unprecedented global challenges.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.