Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation fee) Act, 1992 – ss.2(b)(I), 2(b)(II) and 4(2-A) – Respondent No.2- medical college was established by the Annamalai University – Fee charged by the University was too high as compared to the other Government colleges – Writ petition filed by the students – Highlighting the enormous difference between the fees charged by the University on one hand and the scale fixed by the Government as well as the Committee on Fixation of Fee on the other, they pleaded that the matter for fixation of fee be referred to the Committee in terms of the 1992 Act – Writ petition was dismissed by the High Court and it was held that 1992 Act was not applicable as the concerned institution was not notified by the State Government – University contended that it was entitled to fix fee on its own without the intervention of any Committee – On appeal, held: High Court was completely in error in observing that for the application by the provisions of the 1992 Act an educational institution must always be specified by the Government by notification – The requirement of specification by the Government is only in respect of “any other educational institution or class or classes of educational institutions” u/s. 2(b)(II) of the Act – Whereas, s.2(b)(I) of the Act is an independent and stand alone provision and does not require any specification by the Government – In instant case, the University answered the description u/s.2(b)(I) of the Act – Furthermore, s.4(2-A) of the Act, specifically apply to the courses leading degrees in medicine and Engineering – Therefore, the matter of fixation of fees was to be assessed by the “Committee on Fixation of Fee” as contemplated under 1992 Act and the University was not entitled to devise its own fee structure – Annamalai University Act, 2013 – ss.4(13) and 20(i)(m) – Education/Educational Institutions.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. In the present case the Single Judge of the High Court considered the definition of Educational Institution as appearing in Section 2(e) of the Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation fee) Act, 1992 and came to the conclusion that for the purposes of application of the provisions of 1992 Act the concerned institution ought to have been notified by the State Government and an appropriate reference must be made to the Fee Fixation Committee. This reasoning has been affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court. It is, therefore crucial to consider the scope and ambit of the said provision. For facility the definition of “educational institution” can be divided in two parts as under: Section 2(b) “educational institution” means: (I)
any institution by whatever name called, whether managed by any person, private body, local authority, trust or University, carrying on the activity of imparting education leading to a degree or diploma (including a degree or diploma in law, medicine or engineering) conferred by any University established under any law made by the Legislature of the State of Tamil Nadu.
and
(II) any other educational institution or class or classes of educational institutions (other than any educational institution established by the Central Government or under any law made by Parliament) as the Government may, by notification, specify.[Para 12][1037-E-F; 1038-A]
2.1 According to (I) part of the definition, the activity must lead to award of degree or diploma conferred by any University established under any law made by the Legislature of the State. There is element of certainty about this first part of definition and it is not left to the discretion of the Government in any manner. If there is a course which leads to award of degree or diploma by any University as specified, the concerned institution carrying on the activity of imparting education would be an educational institution within the meaning of said Section 2(b). [Para 12] [1038-B-C]
2.2 The definition has an inclusive provision which is specified in the (II) part and empowers the Government to specify any other educational institution or class or classes of educational institutions. Upon such specification by notification, such institution or class or classes of institutions would also stand covered by the definition. The (II) part also contains a bracketed portion which is an exclusionary aspect of the definition. This bracketed portion excludes any institution established by the Central Government or under any law made by the Parliament with respect to which the State Government cannot, even by exercising power of specification include such institution. [Para 12][1038-D-E]
2.3 The aforesaid analysis thus conclusively establishes that in so far as cases covered under (I) Part are concerned, no specification by the Government is required or necessary. If the concerned activity leads to award of degree or diploma by any University established under any law made by the State Legislature, such institution shall be “educational institution” within the meaning of provisions of Section 2(b). The specification by notification is a pre-requisite only if the institution concerned is otherwise not covered under (I) Part. The High Court was completely in error in observing that for the application by the provisions of 1992 Act an educational institution must always be specified by the Government by notification. The requirement of specification of notification is only in respect of “any other educational institution or class or classes of educational institutions” and has not to be read with (I) part of definition, which part of the definition is an independent and stand alone provision and does not require any specification by the Government. [Para 13] [1038-E-H]
3. According to Section 3(1) of the Annamalai University Act, 2013, on and from the commencement of said Act the University established under the Annamalai University Act, 1928 shall be deemed to have been established and incorporated under the provisions of 2013 Act. It is well settled that whenever a Legislation deems, by way of legal fiction that a particular state of affairs has to be assumed, that legal fiction has to be given full effect. There is no escape from the situation that the University in the present case is the one established under any law made by the Legislature of the State of Tamil Nadu. [Para 15] [1039-A-C]
4. The University by its very nature of activities would be running numerous courses and to that extent provisions of 2013 Act are general in nature. The provisions of Section 4(2-A) of 1992 Act are specific and special and apply to courses leading to degrees in Medicine and Engineering. Therefore, insofar as professional courses leading to degrees in Medicine and Engineering are concerned, the matter must be screened and assessed by Committee on Fixation of Fee and the submission that the University was entitled to fix fees on its own without the intervention of such Committee has to be rejected. [Para 18] [1042-B-D]
5. The University was not entitled and competent to devise its own fee structure in the present matter without having the fee fixed by the Committee on Fixation of Fee as contemplated under 1992 Act. The matters shall therefore have to be referred to said Committee and the University is directed to place the entire material including its balance-sheet and accounts before the Committee of Fixation of Fee. [Para 19][1042-F-G] Islamic Academy of Education and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others (2003) 6 SCC 697 : [2003] 2 Suppl. SCR 474; Cochin University of Science and Technology and Another v. Thomas P. John and Others (2008) 8 SCC 82: [2008] 7 SCR 887 ; Gurupad
Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum and Others (1978) 3 SCC 383 : [1978] 3 SCR 761; P.A. Inamdar and Others v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2005) 6 SCC 537 : [2005] 2 Suppl. SCR 603 – referred to.
East End Dwellings Co. Ltd. v. Finsbury Borough Council (1952) 2 All ER 587 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.