Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(i) an aided school;

(ii) a school established and administered or maintained by the Central Government or the State Government or any local authority;

(iii) a school giving, providing or imparting religious instruction alone but not any other instructions;

Explanation:- For the Purpose of this clause,-

1) code of regulation means the Code of Regulations for Approved Nursery and Primary Schools, Code of Regulations for Matriculation Schools and Code of Regulations for Anglo-Indian Schools;

2) (i) pre-primary school shall consist of Pre-KG to UKG.

5. Constitution of Committee:

(1) The Government shall constitute a committee for the purpose of determination of the fee for admission to any Standard or course of study in private schools;

(2) The committee shall consist of the following members, namely,
 	   (a)	A retired High Court Judge, nominated
 		by the Government.		       Chairperson 

	    (b)	Director of School Education	       Ex-officio Member

	    (c)	Director of Matriculation SchoolsEx-officio Member

	    (d)	Director of Elementary EducationEx-officio Member

	    (e) 	Joint Chief Engineer (Buildings),
		Public Works Department	          Ex-officio Member

	    (f)	Additional Secretary to Government,
		School Education Department	Ex-officio Member-
					       Secretary

14. Mr.Wilson, learned Additional Advocate General, submitted that far more students attended the schools as against the professional courses about which the above mentioned three judgments were rendered. Regulation of fees of the schools was the felt necessity of the society. In the State of Tamil Nadu, there were about 5500 Nursery/Primary Schools, 4100 Matriculation Schools, 38 Anglo Indian Schools and 500 State Board Schools of Tamil Medium totalling to 10,138 schools which were unaided. There was no uniformity in their fee structure and on the face of it large numbers of them were charging very high fees, which could not be justified. It was, therefore, felt necessary to regulate their fees. He placed before us documents and charts to show how excessive fees were charged. He submitted that the State Government was already regulating (1) starting of the schools (2) staffing pattern, strength of teachers (3) facilities/infrastructure and (4) examination. Mr.Wilson, therefore, contended that if that was not objected, why should regulation of fees be objected if that was sought to be done by objective standards as laid down in Section 6(1) of the Act. The State was not against reasonable revenue surplus, but against profiteering.

42. All the petitions stand disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Index:Yes						       (H.L.G., C.J.)  (K.K.S., J)
Internet:Yes							         09.04.2010
Js/pv


To

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, 
    rep.by the Principal Secretary,
    Department of School Education,
    Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2. The Director of School Education,
    DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-6.

3. The Director of Matriculation Schools, 
    DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-6.

4. The Director of Elementary Education,
    DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-6. 

5.  Ex-officio Member Secretary,
    Additional Secretary,
    Department of School Education,
    PTA Building, DPI Campus, College Road,
    Chennai-6.

6.  The Chief Educational Officer,
Collectorate Campus, Karur. 
 
 
                                                               THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE  
			   	AND
		                  K.K. SASIDHARAN, J.
 															                     pv/-












		             	 Pre-delivery judgment in
W.P.Nos.627, 815, 850, 851, 852, 854,	    855,1105,1269, 2833, 3620 & 112 of 2010 and
			 M.P.Nos.1 of 2010 (10 MPs) and M.P.
















		            	Delivered on:     09.4.2010