Madhya Pradesh High Court
Samrat Ashok Technological Institute vs State Of M.P. on 21 April, 2015
1 W.P. No.396/2010
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
BENCH AT GWALIOR
JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL.
Writ Petition No.396/2010
Samrat Ashok Technological Institute
vs.
State of M.P. & Ors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Anmol Khedkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Nidhi Patankar, Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(21/04/2015) The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution with a prayer to direct the respondents to make the payment of Rs.4,01,37,750/-. It is prayed that said amount be released with interest.
2. The case of the petitioner is that it is a private Non-Government Engineering Institution. The State is granting grant-in-aid to the petitioner institution. Earlier, the respondents used to refund the tuition fees of the students, whose parents are having green-card. By placing reliance on a judgment of this Court, Annexure P-24 (W.P.No.452/2008), it is contended that the petitioner is similarly situated and, therefore, the said judgment may be made applicable in the present case. It is further contended that the respondents have committed an error in not releasing the said amount.
3. Per contra, Ms. Nidhi Patankar, learned Government Advocate submits that the earlier arrangement of refund of tuition fees to the wards of green-card holders has been discontinued by 2 W.P. No.396/2010 order/circular dated 3.7.2009, Annexure P-10. This was further clarified in the letter dated 21.07.2009, Annexure P-12. It is submitted that in view of these Government circulars, petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit.
4. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court on a chart, Annexure P-23. It is contended that it is a list of eligible the students from Session 2001 to 2008/2009. It is contended that petitioner's institution being similarly situated, is entitled to get the similar order, which was passed by this Court in W.P.No.452/2008.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
6. W.P.No.452/2008 was filed much before the issuance of the order dated 3.7.2009, Annexure P-10. Thus, this Court had no occasion to examine the effect of the said circular in W.P.No.452/2008. As per the then existing provision, this Court opined that the petitioner is entitled to get the benefits, which were claimed in the said petition. However, in the present case, petitioner himself has filed the circular dated 03.07.2009 as Annexure P-10. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge the validity of the circular dated 03.07.2009 and Annexure P-12, dated 21.07.2009. The para 3 & 4 of the circular dated 03.07.2009 reads as under:-
**3@ iwoZ O;oLFkk vuqlkj v'kkldh; laLFkkvksa esa v/;;ujr@izos'k ikus okys Nk=ksa dks f'k{k.k 'kqYd ekQh@izfriwfrZ dh ik=rk ugha jgsxhA 4@ fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; ¼'kkldh; Lo'kklh½] 'kkldh; vfHk;kaf=dh egkfo|ky;ksa] 'kkldh; ikWyhVsDuhd] 'kkldh; vkS|ksfxd izf'k{k.k laLFkkvksa esa fnukad 13@05@2003 ds iwoZ ulcanh djkus okys leLr 3 W.P. No.396/2010 xzhu dkMZ /kkjdksa rFkk fnukad 13@05@2003 ds ckn ulcanh djkus okys dsoy xjhch js[kk ds uhps thou ;kiu djus okys xzhu dkMZ /kkjdksa dh larkuksa dks dsoy ,d gh fMxzh@ikB~;dze gsrq f'k{k.k 'kqYd esa NwV dh ik=rk gksxhA vko';d gksus ij bl laLFkkvksa dks vuqnku lacaf/kr iz'kkldh; foHkkx }kjk fn;k tk;sxkA mDr vkns'k rRdky izHkko'khy gksaxsA**
7. It is clear that w.e.f. 3.7.2009, the students of private institution are not entitled to get relaxation/refund in tuition fees. In absence of challenge to this circular, the students who have paid tuition fees after 03.07.2009 cannot seek refund on the basis of earlier circulars, which were clarified/modified by circular dated 03.07.2009. Putting it differently, as per circular dated 03.07.2009, the students/institution cannot seek refund for the students who have paid the tuition fees after 03.07.2009. The chart submitted by the petitioner as Annexure P-23 does not throw light as to when tuition fees was paid by the students. It does not contain any particulars about the date of sterilization operation of their parents, as per Clause 4 of the circular dated 3.7.2009. Only if condition of Para
4 of circular dated 03.07.2009 are fulfilled, the students can seek refund. In absence of any particulars/data in this petition, no direction can be passed in this regard. Accordingly, I deem it proper to dispose of this petition with the following directions:-
(i) As per Circulars dated 03.07.2009 and 21.07.2009, the students who have paid tuition fees after issuance of Annexure P-10 & Annexure P-12 are not entitled for any refund.
(ii) The students who have paid fees before issuance of said circulars may get refund, if condition No.4 4 W.P. No.396/2010 of Circular dated 3.07.2009 are fulfilled.
(iii) Petitioner's institution may prefer a detailed application pregnant with relevant data as required in para 4 of the circular dated 3.7.2009 and submit it before the respondents.
(iv) In turn, the said respondents are directed to decide the said application in the light of the aforesaid observations within 90 days. Those students whose cases are covered as per the aforesaid observations shall be entitled for refund of tuition fees.
As analyzed above, the judgment passed in W.P.No.452/2008 is clearly distinguishable because of issuance of subsequent circulars, Annexures P-10 & Annexure P-12.
8. Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. No costs.
9. C.C. as per rules.
(Sujoy Paul)
(ra) Judge