Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court on Tuesday sought to know the stand of the TS government on a PIL seeking to constitute fee regulatory authority for regulation of the fee structure in private unaided junior colleges in the state.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice Shameem Akhter was dealing with a PIL by TS TD secretary M. Satyam, challenging the failure of the authorities to prevent private junior colleges from collecting exorbitant fees.
T. Rajanikanth Reddy, counsel for petitioner, submitted that as per the Education Act, it was the responsibility of the state government to constitute a committee to regulate fees in private junior colleges.
He said in the absence of a regulatory committee, the colleges have been collecting huge amounts from parents.
TS A-G K. Ramakrishna Reddy submitted that the TS government constituted a committee to prescribe fees in private junior colleges last year and the panel has prescribed the fee structure.
Petitioner’s counsel said that they were seeking constitution of regulatory commission on the lines of the fee regulatory commission constituted for private engineering colleges.
The bench said, “On one hand, the petitioner is saying that private colleges are collecting huge amounts, but on the other hand, there is no decrease in admissions. What could be done when every parent wants his child to become a doctor or engineer?”
While issuing notices to the respondents by directing them to file their counter affidavits, the bench posted the case to after four weeks.
TS plea to vacate stay goes unheard
The Hyderabad High Court on Tuesday expressed its disinclination to hear a plea by the TS government to vacate interim orders granted on February 7, 2017 directing it not to dispossess farmers from their 240 acres of land in Gowliwada village of Peddapally district for the proposed Sundilla Barrage, as an urgent matter.
When the AA-G made a mention before a division bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan for taking up hearing, the bench made it clear that it will not hear the matter without allowing the petitioner to file the reply.
