No Retrospective Applicability Of Direction Asking College To Refund Excess Fees: Supreme Court Asks Chhattisgarh Dental College To Enchash Students’ Bank Guarantees

The appeals before the Apex Court challenged the judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court whereby the writ petition filed by appellant-college objecting to the fee fixation came to be dismissed and a batch of writ petitions filed by the students (admitted to the BDS course in the appellant-college in the academic years 2003- 2004 and 2004-2005) came to be allowed thereby directing the students to pay tuition fee at the rate of the fee fixed i.e., Rs 1,25,000. The Bench further directed that any amount paid by the students in excess shall be refunded by the appellant college.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Of India B. R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih said, “In that view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the High Court was not justified in directing the refund of excess fee to the students who were admitted prior to the academic year 2005-2006.”

Advocate Jasbir Singh Malik represented the Appellant while AOR Manjeet Kirpal represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The appellant college was established after obtaining formal permission from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. In the prospectus of the appellant college, the fee was fixed at Rs 2,12,500 (tuition fee) for the general category candidates and Rs 1,12,500 (tuition fee) plus Rs 12,500 (caution fee) for reserved category candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC. Accordingly, the appellant-college admitted the respondents-students. Thereafter, on the directions of the Apex Court, a Fee Fixation Committee was constituted by the State. The Fee Fixation Committee determined the fee structure at Rs 1,25,000 for the appellant college. It was made clear that the said fee would be effective from the academic year 2005-2006 for three years i.e., up to the academic year 2007-2008.

The appellant-college, being aggrieved with the fee fixation on the ground that it was done without considering any material, approached the High Court, but the college was directed to change the fee structure with effect from the academic year 2005-2006. Meanwhile, some of the students, who were admitted in the year 2003-2004, filed a writ petition wherein the High Court restrained the appellant college from demanding a fee in excess of the fee fixed by the Fee Fixation Committee. The High Court directed that any amount paid by the students in excess of the fees fixed by the Fee Fixation Committee shall be refunded by the College.

Arguments

It was the case of the appellant-College that the once the fee structure was determined by the Fee Fixation Committee which was from the academic year 2005-2006, the High Court could not have made the said fee structure applicable retrospectively, thereby directing a refund of the excess fee.

Reasoning

The Bench, at the outset, said, “We find substance in the said submission of the learned counsel for the appellant-college.”

It was further noticed that it was only subsequent to the judgment of this Court in the case of Islamic Academy of Education and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others (2003), that the fee structure came to be determined and the Fee Fixation Committee directed that Rs.1,25,000 would be applicable and that too only from the academic year 2005- 2006 onwards. The Apex Court held that the High Court was not justified in directing the refund of the excess fee to the students who were admitted prior to the academic year 2005-2006.

The Bench took note of the fact that in pursuance of the earlier order passed by the Court in the present proceedings, the fee had already been refunded to the students. However, the students were also directed to furnish bank guarantees with respect to such a refund upon release of their documents. Even those students who had not paid any fee were directed to furnish bank guarantees of Rs 1,00,000 upon release of their documents.

The Bench thus disposed of the appeal by permitting the appellant-college to encash the bank guarantees executed by the students.

Cause Title: Chhattisgarh Dental College And Research Institute v. Shweta Kabra and Others Etc (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 720)

Appearance:

Appellants: Advocates Jasbir Singh Malik, Rhythm Bharadwaj, Vijender Singh Ahlawat, Niharika Singh, AOR Varun Punia, AOR Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR

Respondents: AOR Manjeet Kirpal, AOR Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Vijay K. Jain, AOR Akshat Shrivastava, Advocates Palash Pareek, Vibhor Jain, Pooja Shrivastava, AOR Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Ankita Sharma, Advocate Arjun D. Singh

Click here to read/download Judgment