On 28.5.2014, this court had passed the following order:-
"The petitioners claim to be students of B. Ed. course from Mahatma Buddha Mahavidyalaya Ajuha, Kaushambi, which is affiliated to Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj University (respondent no.2). It seems that the fee for the said course was fixed at Rs.51,250/- by the order passed by the Fee Committee constituted in this regard. It has come on record that challenging the order of the Fee Committee, appeal has been filed before the Appellate Tribunal, which is pending.Writ petition no. 3532 of 2013 was filed by the Management before the Lucknow Bench of this Court, in which the Institution was permitted to charge fee to the tune of Rs.73,562/- with rider that the increased amount collected from the students shall be deposited with the University.
The petitioners claim that the fee of Rs.51,250/- as determined by the Fee Committee has been reimbursed by the Government. As regards the difference amount of Rs.22,312/-, the Principal of the Institution had given an undertaking before the District Social Welfare Officer, Kausambi that no student shall be deprived of his/her right to appear in the examination on account of increase in fee. It is stated that now the last date for filling the examination form is 31st May, 2014, but the Institution is not accepting the examination form on the ground that the petitioners have failed to pay the difference in amount in the fee as a result of increase therein. It is contended that in view of the undertaking given by the Principal of the Institution, before the District Social Welfare Officer, Kaushambi, the Institution cannot refuse to accept the examination forms. It is further contended that in case there is increase in fee then it is the Government which is liable to reimburse the Institution on behalf of the petitioners. As such, petitioners cannot be deprived of their rights to appear in the examination.
Prima facie, the contention appears to have force.
Notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 3 has been accepted by learned standing counsel and by Sri Neeraj Tiwari on behalf of respondent no.2.
Issue notice to respondent no.4 by registered post.
Steps to be taken within a week.
All the respondents may file their counter affidavit within three weeks.The petitioners will have two weeks thereafter for filing rejoinder affidavit.
List in the 2nd week of July, 2014.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent no.4 is directed to accept the examination forms of the petitioners provisionally and forward the same to the University, subject to further orders of this Court."
Pursuant to the above order, Sri Rahul Agarwal has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 4 and has already filed counter affidavit.
The apprehension expressed by Sri Rahul Agarwal on behalf of respondent no. 4 is that if the Appellate Tribunal enhances the fees from that which was fixed by the Fee Committee and the students are permitted to give their examination and leave the institution, then the enhanced fee, even if reimbursed by the concerned Social Welfare Department may not be recoverable by the respondent no.4., in as much as, once the students leave the institution, fees even if transferred to their account will not be transferred tothe account of respondent no. 4.
The apprehension expressed by the counsel for respondent no. 4 appears to be justified.
In view of above, the learned standing counsel shall seek instructions from respondent nos. 1 and 3 as to how the respondent no. 4 would be re-compensated in case the Appellate Tribunal set aside the decision of the Fee Committee and enhances the fee from that fixed by the Fee Committee to the one that is claimed by respondent no. 4.
Instructions may be sought within a week.
List this case on 19.9.2014. In the meantime, the interim order granted earlier would continue.
Order Date :- 11.9.2014 SKS