1 W.P.No.

28278/2019

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR

(Division Bench)

W.P.No.28278/2019

Dr. Mayank Karode & others

vs.

State of Madhya Pradesh & others

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the
State.
Shri Siddharth Radhelal Gupta, learned counsel for the Caveator.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Yadav, Judge.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Subodh Abhyankar, Judge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
Jabalpur, Dated : 24.01.2020
Per : Sanjay Yadav, J.

With consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is

finally heard.

2. The petitioners pursuing their Post Graduate courses in Master

of Surgery (MS) and Doctor of Medicine (MD) since academic

session 2019-20 have raised grievance against the order passed on

28.09.2019 by the Appellate Authority, the Admission & Fee

Regulatory Commission, Bhopal; whereby, the fee for academic

 2 W.P.No.28278/2019

sessions 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 has been increased from

Rs.11,55,000/- per annum to 13,75,000/- per annum.

3. The facts briefly are that the petitioners were granted

admission in the courses MS/MD after clearing NEET PG 2019 in

respondent No.3-College, a private college, in furtherance to the

counselling for admission conducted on 08.03.2019. It is contended

on behalf of the petitioners that at the time of admission, Director,

Medical Education, Bhopal informed the petitioners that fee

structure for Post Graduate courses MS/MD will be Rs.

Rs.11,55,000/- per annum. The petitioners after taking loan from the

Bank took admission. It is further submitted that the Director,

Medical Education, Bhopal on 02.04.2019 informed the petitioners

that fee structure will be same which is applicable to the petitioners

at the time of admission. A copy of said communication is brought

on record as Annexure P/2. It is further contended that the fee

structure as per NEET 2018 dated 31.03.2018 of said medical

college for the Post Graduate courses MS/MD was Rs.10,75,000/-,

whereafter, the fee structure for the session 2019-2020, 2020-2021

and 2021-2022 was fixed at Rs.11,55,000/- per annum on

23.08.2019. It is urged that the petitioners were assured of that the

fee structure would be Rs.11,55,000/- per annum and the petitioners

have taken admission in the Post Graduate Courses MS/MD on the

basis of counselling and allotment of seats. It is urged that, suddenly,

behind the back of the petitioners, fee structure has been increased

from Rs.11,55,000/- per annum to 13,75,000/- per annum for the

said sessions.
 3 W.P.No.28278/2019

4. It is further urged that increase in the fee structure has been on

the basis that since the State of Madhya Pradesh has increased the

stipend of the students pursuing MS/MD from Rs.45,000/- to

55,000/- per month, therefore, an increase of 2,20,000/- per annum

has been made in the fee structure. It is urged that the action of the

respondents in enhancing the fee from Rs.11,55,000/- per annum to

13,75,000/- per annum is contrary to the law laid down by the

Supreme Court in the case of Islamic Academy of Education vs

State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697.

“156. While this Court has not laid down any fixed
guidelines as regard fee structure, in my opinion,
reasonable surplus should ordinarily vary from 6% to
15%, as such surplus would be utilized for expansion of
the system and development of. education.
157. The institutions shall charge fee only for one year
in accordance with the rules and shall not charge the
fees for the entire course.
158. Profiteering has been defined in Black's Law
Dictionary, Fifth edition as:
"Taking- advantage of unusual or
exceptional circumstances to make
excessive profits."
159. With a view to ensure that an educational
institution is kept within its bounds, and does not
indulge in profiteering or otherwise exploiting its
students financially, it will be open to the statutory
authorities and in its absence by the State to constitute
an appropriate body, till appropriate statutory
regulations are made in that behalf.
160. The respective institutions, however, for the
aforementioned purpose must file an appropriate
application before the Committee and place before it all
documents and books of accounts in support of its case.
161. Fees once fixed should not ordinarily be changed
for a period of three years, unless there exists extra-
 4 W.P.No.28278/2019

ordinary reason. The proposed fees, before indication in

the prospectus issued for admission, have to be
approved by the concerned authority/ Body set up. For
this purpose the application should not be filed later than
April of the preceding year, of the relevant education
session. The authority/ Body shall take the decision as
regards fees chargeable later by October of the year
concerned, so that it can form part of the prospectus. No
institution should charge any fee beyond the amount
fixed and the fee charged shall be deposited in a
nationalised bank. In other words, no employee or any
other person employed by the Management shall be
entitled to take fees in cash from the students concerned
directly, The statutory authority may consider the
desirability of framing an appropriate regulation inter
alia to the effect that in the event it is found that the
management of a private unaided professional institution
has accepted any amount other than the fees prescribed
by the Committee, it may have to pay a penalty ten to
fifteen times of the amount so collected and in a suitable
case it may also lose its recognition or affiliation.”

5. It is further contended that in an identical matter which

travelled from Indore Bench of this High Court forming subject

matter of SLP (C) Diary No.38536/2018, SLP was allowed to be

withdrawn with a liberty to seek review before the High Court,

whereon, in Review Petition, R.P.No.98/2019 (Vishal Khare vs. Sri

Aurobindo Institute of Medical Science) vide order dated

26.07.2019, Indore Bench of this Court allowed the Review Petition

and the order passed in Writ Petition No.5263/2017 of upholding

enhancing of fee has been recalled with direction to refund the

excess fee amount within a period of one month. It is urged that the

case of the petitioners is similar to that of the petitioners in Writ

Petition No.5763/2017, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for

 5 W.P.No.28278/2019

similar direction as has been made out to the petitioners therein. The

petitioners, thus, seek quashment of order dated 28.09.2019.

6. Respondent No.3-College has filed the return.

7. While contradicting the statement made on behalf of the

petitioners that fee has been enhanced behind the back of the

petitioners without issuing any notice. It is urged that being a private

University, it is governed by the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Niji

Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 2008 (referred to as Adhiniyam,

2008). It is urged that under statute the annual fee fixed by the

Madhya Pradesh private Universities Regulatory Commission,

Bhopal vide its order/letter No.498/2019 dated 26.03.2019 for the

Post Graduate courses was Rs.11.55 Lakhs; whereagainst, the

respondent preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority. The

Appeal was decided on 03.04.2019; whereby, while setting aside the

order by Regulatory Committee, the Appellate Court remitted the

matter with the direction “The Appellate Authority has been

informed that the process of counselling is going on and, therefore,

it is directed that the Secretariat should inform the Director, Medical

Federation that ascertaining of amount of fee to be charged by the

appellants is under consideration and fee to be charged from the

students admitted through counselling shall be subject to the final

amount arrived at by AFRC/Appellate Authority as the case may be.

Whatever amount shown in the website of DME, shall be considered

provisional as of now.” It is urged that in furtherance to the direction

the Director Medical Education issued the public notice on

05.04.2019 on the official website pertaining to the counselling and

 6 W.P.No.28278/2019

admission process; whereby the participating students were

informed that the fee fixed of the colleges was purely provisional

and is subjected to final outcome of the decision of AFRC. It is

urged that in furtherance to said public notice the students were

required to furnish unconditional undertaking on a non-judicial

stamp paper that the fee decided by AFRC will be binding on them.

It is urged that in pursuance thereto all the 52 students who are

petitioners furnished duly notarized undertaking on non-judicial

stamp paper of Rs.100 and took admission. On these contentions the

respondent seeks dismissal of petition.

8. The State of Madhya Pradesh supports the contention raised

on behalf of the respondent No.3.

9. Considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

10. The only ground on which the petitioners have questioned the

enhancement of fee from Rs.11,55,000/- per annum to 13,75,000/-

per annum is that the same has been without giving an opportunity

of hearing and behind the back. However, the documents on record

reveals that the fee Rs.11,55,000/- per annum was provisional and

the students were duly informed by the DME about the same which

is evident from public notice issued on 05.04.2019 reproduced for

ready reference:
”**’kS{kf.kd ’kqYd izkof/kd (Provisional)
fuft fpfdRlk@nar fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; & LukrdksRrj ikB;dze
(,e0Mh0@,e0,l0@,eMh,l) uhV ih0th0&2019
Appeal No.MPPURC-03/2019, Appeal No.MPPURC-04/2019 & Appeal
No.MPPURC-05/2019 dated 03.04.2019.
S.No. Name of Institute Course Session Annual
2019-20 Tuition Fee
 7 W.P.No.28278/2019

(per year) in Indian

Tuition Fee Rupees.
(Open) (NRI)
1 People’s College of MD/MS 10,75,000/- 32,25,000/-
Medical Sciences, (Clinical)
Bhopal
2 People’s College of MD/MS (Non- 7,00,000/- 21,00,000/-
Medical Sciences, Clinical)
Bhopal
3 Index Medical MD/MS 10,46,000/- 31,38,000/-
College, Indore (Clinical)
4 Index Medical MD/MS (Non- 5,60,000/- 16,80,000/-
College, Indore Clinical)
5 L.N.Medical College, MD (Non- 10,50,000/- 31,50,000/-
Bhopal Clinical)
6 L.N.Medical College, MD/MS 11,55,000/- 34,65,000/-
Bhopal (Clinical)
7 People’s College of MDS 3,00,000/- 9,00,000/-
Dental Science,
Bhopal
8 People’s Dental MDS 3,00,000/- 9,00,000/-
Academy, Bhopal
Note- Amount of fee to be charged by the appellants is
under consideration and fee to be charged on the
students admitted through counselling shall be subject
to the final amount arrived at by AFRC/Appellate
authority as the case may be.”

11. The petitioners had information about the fee being

provisional is evident from the undertaking given by them before

admission, which is not denied. The petitioners are now estopped

from retracting from the undertaking. Rather they have concealed

the fact of giving the undertaking which was well within their

knowledge and yet the plea is taken that the fee is enhanced behind

their back. The petitioners thus have not come with clean hands.

12. In Ramjas Foundation vs Union of India (2010) 14 SCC 38,

it is held :
 8 W.P.No.28278/2019

“21. The principle that a person who does not come to

the court with clean hands is not entitled to be heard on
the merits of his grievance and, in any case, such
person is not entitled to any relief is applicable not
only to the petitions filed under Articles 32, 226 and
136 of the Constitution but also to the cases instituted
in others courts and judicial forums. The object
underlying the principle is that every court is not only
entitled but is duty bound to protect itself from
unscrupulous litigants who do not have any respect for
truth and who try to pollute the stream of justice by
resorting to falsehood or by making misstatement or by
suppressing facts which have a bearing on adjudication
of the issue(s) arising in the case.”

13. In view whereof, the petition deserves to be and is dismissed

with costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand), to be equally

borne by the petitioners and deposited with the Madhya Pradesh

Legal Services Authority within thirty days from the date of

communication of this order.

14. All Interlocutory Applications stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Yadav) (Subodh Abhyankar)

Judge Judge

anand
Digitally signed by
ANAND KRISHNA SEN
Date: 2020.02.05
10:36:49 +05'30'