Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shristi Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 September, 2015
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR
Writ Petition No : 4295 of 2015
Piru Dhakad
- V/s -
State of MP and another.
Writ Petition No : 5441 of 2015
Ritu Anand Vishwakarma
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Writ Petition No : 5442 of 2015
Prachi Chowdhary
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Writ Petition No : 5444 of 2015
Shristi Yadav
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Writ Petition No : 5445 of 2015
Anmol Yadav
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Writ Petition No : 5446 of 2015
Vaibhav Modi
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Writ Petition No : 5629 of 2015
Arpit Shivhare
- V/s -
State of MP and another
2
Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters.
Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
Writ Petition No : 5947 of 2015
Varsha Patel
- V/s -
State of MP and another
Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon.
Hon'ble Shri Justice C.V. Sirpurkar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all the cases:
Shri G.S. Ahluwalia and Shri Dhruv Verma,
Counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Government Advocate,
For the State/respondent No.1.
Shri Sankalp Kochar, counsel for respondent No.2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.
ORDER
28/09/2015 As common questions of law and fact are involved in all these cases, they are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, pleadings and documents available in the record of Writ Petition No. 4295/2015 are being referred to in this order. 2- Petitioners are students who are prosecuting courses of study namely - LLM or BA.LLB (Hons) in National Law Institute University, Bhopal. They belong to the OBC category and it is their contention that as their father/guardian's income is less than the income fixed by the State Government, entitling a student to seek reimbursement of the fees from the State Government, they have filed this writ petition seeking refund of the fees or payment of Tuition Fee, in accordance to the policy of the State Government to them or to the University.
3Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters. Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
3- In W.P. No. 4295/2015, petitioner is a student who appeared in the Common Law Admission Test, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as 'CLAT') and was granted admission in the LLM Course. 4- In all other cases, the students were granted admission in the BA LLB (Hons) Course after participating in CLAT. In W.P. No. 5947/2015, petitioner was granted admission in the Academic Session 2012-2013. In W.P. No. 5441/2015, petitioner was granted admission in the Academic Session 2013-2014. In W.P. No. 5442/2015, petitioner was granted admission in the Academic Session 2010-2011. In W.P. No. 5444/2015, petitioner was granted admission in Academic Session 2010- 2011. In the remaining three cases namely - W.P. Nos. 5445/2015, 5446/2015 and 5629/2015, the petitioners were granted admission in the Academic Session 2014-2015.
5- According to the petitioners, the State Government has formulated a Policy granting scholarship/payment of Tuition Fee to the students, known as the Scheme of 2003 effective from 1st of July, 2003 and in Clause 5.2 of the aforesaid Scheme it is clearly indicated that a student admitted to the courses will be reimbursed the entire fees. It is indicated that this Scheme was incorporated for the purpose of granting Scholarship to candidates belonging to the OBC category and while extending the benefit of the Scheme, it was indicated that like full reimbursement granted to candidate belonging to the SC/ST category, students of the OBC category will also be granted full reimbursement. Grievance of the petitioners is that when they were admitted to the course the Scheme of 2003 was in force and as such they are entitled to reimbursement of the entire fees. They claim that the Institute came out with a case that the students have to first deposit the fee and reimbursement can be claimed thereafter from the Government. It is the case of the petitioners that the Government used to deposit the fees of the student in the account of the student or pay the University directly and thereafter the students were permitted to participate in the examination. According to the petitioners, as the Government has 4 Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters. Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
stopped payment of fees to them, therefore, they have filed the writ petitions.
6- On notices being issued, the State Government has filed a detailed reply and in the reply it is indicated that even the Scheme of 2003 was in vogue, but now the Government has issued a different Policy i.e... Policy dated 12.12.2013 - Annexure R/1, filed alongwith the return in Writ Petition No. 4295/2015, and it is said that now under Clause 5.3 of the aforesaid Scheme, the full fee payable is not refunded, but only such fees is refunded which is fixed for Government Institute and, therefore, it is the case of the State Government that petitioners would be entitled only to the fees to the extent indicated in Clause 5.3 of Annexure R/1.
7- Clause 5.3 of Annexure R/1, reads as under:-
"5.3 fo|kfFkZ;ksa dks ukekadu@iath;u] f'k{k.k] [ksydwn] ;wfuQkeZ] iqLrdky;] i=&if=dk,a] fpfdRlk&tkap Qhl dk rFkk 'kS{kf.kd laLFkk ;k fo'ofo|ky;@eaMy dks fo|kFkhZ }kjk vfuok;Z #i ls nh tkus okyh ,slh vU; Qhl dk Hkqxrku fd;k tk,xk] ijUrq blesa vo/kku jkf'k] izfrHkwfr tek tSlh okilh ;ksX; tek jde esa 'kkfey ugha gksxh ,oa ;g Qhl mlh lhek rd ns; gksxh tks fdlh 'kkldh; laLFkk esa mlh ikB~;Øe esa v/;;ujr~ fiNM+s oxZ ds fo|kFkhZ ls yh tkrh gSA lacaf/kr f'k{k.k laLFkkvksa dks Hkh rnk'k; dh fu/kkZfjr 'kkldh; Qhl ds lerqY; jkf'k dh izfriwfrZ dh tkosxhA "
(Emphasis supplied) 8- However, rebutting the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that even now for the Academic Session 2015-2016, this Scheme contained in Annexure R/1 dated 12.12.2013 has been withdrawn and now from the year 2015 onwards, full fees is being refunded as was done earlier under the Scheme of 2003. That apart, it is the contention of the petitioners that when they were admitted to the 5 Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters. Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
course in question prior to 12.12.2013, the Scheme of 2003 was in vogue, they took admission in the National Law University on the assurance of the Government and being satisfied that they will get full refund of fee as per the Scheme of 2003, and now in the midst of the course, by this impugned Circular dated 12.12.2013 retrospective effect cannot be given to the Circular and students who have taken admission prior to 12.12.2013 cannot be put to dis-advantage by introducing a Scheme which was not applicable when they took admission prior to 12.12.2013.
9- Accordingly, it is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that students who took admission prior to 12.12.2013, are entitled to full refund of the fees as per the system prevailing when they took admission. That apart, they argue that now as the Scheme dated 12.12.2013 - Annexure R/1 is no more in existence, all the petitioners should be granted the benefit of refund of Tuition Fee in accordance to the Scheme of 2003, and the subsequent scheme now introduced for the Session 2015-2016.
10- We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we are of the considered view that grant of scholarship or refund of Tuition Fee is a matter of policy based on the decision of the Government in the form of a benevolent scheme to be implemented strictly in accordance to the Scheme brought forth by the Government. It is not a statutory scheme and, therefore, a writ Court can only enforce the Scheme in accordance to its existence without any change or modifications unless called for under law. Admittedly, in the year 2003, the Scheme in force contemplated refund of the entire Tuition Fee to a student, who belonged to the OBC category, but between 12.12.2013 till commencement of the Academic Session 2015-2016, the Scheme of 2003 was not in existence, but the Scheme as is contained in Annexure R/1 dated 12.12.2013 was in vogue. Accordingly, the students/petitioners are only entitled to refund of the Tuition Fee or scholarship in accordance to the Scheme as was applicable at the time of their admission to a particular course.6
Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters. Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
11- Once a student seeks admission and when he applies for admission to a particular course and takes up admission, he is influenced by the promise given by the State Government for refund of his Tuition Fee and he takes admission under a bonafide belief that for the entire course his Tuition Fee shall be refunded. That being so, once the State Government gives a promise to a student at the time of his admission, the State Government has to fulfil the promise and grant refund of the Tuition Fee for the entire duration of course as originally promised at the time of admission. In the midst of the course, the principle of estoppel and acquiescence will apply and the State Government cannot withdraw the Scheme or the provision to the dis-advantage of the students. That being so, we are of the considered view that such of the students who took admission based on the Scheme of 2003 and who were admitted to the course in question prior to 12.12.2013, are entitled to refund of the entire Tuition Fees in accordance to the Scheme of 2003, as was applicable in their case when they took admission prior to coming into force of Scheme contained in Annexure R/1 on 12.12.2013. Accordingly, all the petitioners who are admitted to the course in question prior to 12.12.2013 are entitled to grant of Tuition Fee/its refund in accordance to the Scheme of 2003, for the entire duration of the course.
12- However, such of the students who were admitted after the Circular dated 12.12.2013 - Annexure R/1 came into force and till the Scheme of 2015 was brought into force during the period 2015-2016, will be entitled to refund of Tuition Fee, in accordance to the Scheme - Annexure R/1 dated 12.12.2013 till its existence and thereafter from Academic Session 2015-2016, the entire Tuition Fee will have to be refunded.
13- Accordingly, we issue the following directions:-
(a) The students who took admission prior to 12.12.2013 will be entitled to full refund of the fees for the entire duration of the Course and the Scheme contained in Annexure R/1 dated 12.12.2013 shall not adversely affect them. The said 7 Writ Petition No :: 4295 / 2015 & Connected Matters.
Piru Dhakad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another.
Circular shall not be made applicable to them, their cases shall be governed by the Scheme of 2003.
(b) The students who were admitted when the Circular -
Annexure R/1 dated 12.12.2013 and the Scheme contained therein was in force, will be entitled to refund of fees as per this Circular dated 12.12.2013, till the New Scheme was introduced in the year 2015, for the Academic Session 2015-2016. They will be entitled to refund of Tuition Fee in accordance to the new Scheme of 2015-2016, as pointed out by the parties after the Circular - Annexure R/1 was superceded and the new scheme came into force for the Academic Session 2015-2016.
(c) Such of the students who have already paid the Tuition Fee and have passed out from the University after conclusion of the course may submit a representation to the competent authority of the State Government, with proof of payment of the Tuition Fee and on the same being done, the entire Tuition Fee paid by them shall be refunded by the State Government within a period of 60 days of submission of the representation, as per the direction issued in Clause (a) and
(b) of this order, as may be applicable to a particular student.
14- With the aforesaid observations, all the writ petitions stand disposed of.
( RAJENDRA MENON ) ( C.V. SIRPURKAR )
JUDGE JUDGE
Aks/-