It is not often that you see 11 judges of the Supreme Court hearing a case. But they did in the 2001 TMA Pai case and ruled that private unaided educational institutions had the 'fundamental right' to determine their own fee structure. Of course, the fee could be “reasonably” regulated by the government. In 1995 the Karnataka government came out with a regulation effectively limiting the 'development fund fee' to be collected by schools from a student to just Rs. 600 a year. Guess how many private unaided schools in Karnataka comply with this regulation today? Almost none.
In response to petitions from Karnataka schools, the Supreme Court observed in 2004 that a large number of the state's regulations violated its TMA Pai ruling and directed the government to modify them suitably. Although the government ignored the Supreme Court order, it rarely enforces these regulations, which still remain on paper.
In law, private unaided schools have the freedom to set their own fee structure. But they are required to issue a receipt for the fee collected and also inform students about the fee in advance. Every rupee they collect is meant to be used only for the benefit of the school and nothing else. If the government comes across a school diverting its fee for illegal or other purpose, it has every right to ruthlessly shut it down.
But coming out with mindless fee regulation makes no sense. Onlya lazy and inefficient government would make such regulations. We are not dealing with medical education or such other education with limited seats here. If you have a genuine reason to not like a private unaided school, the law does not expect you to complain excessively as you have a choice to opt for government schools where education is altogether free. In fact 80 per cent of all schools in Karnataka are government -run, four per cent are aided, and a mere 16 per cent are private unaided institutions.
