'Abuse of law!' HC Slams Medical College for MBBS Fee Hike

Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court recently set aside an order issued by the Appellate Authority, UP Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee), allowing Mathura-based Krishna Mohan Medical College to increase the MBBS fees by an exorbitant amount.

"... this Court is of the view that the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority is not sustainable and is hereby set aside. The respondent College is restrained from raising any enhanced fee from the petitioners," ordered the HC bench comprising Justice Saral Srivastava.

Further, the Court noted that the students were forced to pay significantly higher fees than what the college itself had prayed for in its appeal before the UP Private Professional Education Institutions Act. While the college had prayed for fixation of fee before the Appellate Authority at the rate of Rs.43,63,088/- per student for MBBS Course for the Session 2019-20, the students who opted for normal room had paid Rs.57,66,000/-, the students who opted air-cooled room had paid Rs.62,16,000/- and the students who opted air-conditioned room had paid Rs.66,66,000/-, noted the Court.

In this regard, the HC bench observed, "From the aforesaid fact, it is evident that the students have paid more fee than what has been claimed by the respondent College in the appeal, and for this reason also, the impugned order does not sustain."

The Court also slammed the college for filing multiple petitions before the Appellate authority seeking the same relief, however, without disclosing it. Taking note of this, the Court termed the act as gross negligence on the part of the college and an "abuse of process of law".

These observations were made by the Court while considering the petitions filed by MBBS students of K.M (Krishna Mohan) University, Mathura. They were admitted to the MBBS First Year Course during the Academic Session 2019-2020. Filing the plea, the petitioners assailed the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority, UP Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) by which, the Appellate Authority has set aside the Government Orders dated 14.07.2017 and 01.07.2019 and referred the matter to the Fee Fixation Committee to determine the fee for the Session 2019-20.

On 14.10.2017, a Government Order was issued with the consultation of the Fee Fixation Committee constituted under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006 fixing the fee for the Sessions 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020.

As per the Government Order dated 14.07.2017, the fee of the petitioners' institution was fixed for the aforesaid session as Rs.8,50,000/- per year. However, the college did not admit MBBS students for the Sessions 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 due to the non-issuance of a Letter of Permission (LoP) by the erstwhile Medical Council of India.

Finally, the college obtained LoP from the erstwhile MCI in 2019 for commencing the course for the Session 2019-2020 and thereafter, the petitioners were admitted to the college after clearing the NEET exam.

After admission, a Government Order dated 01.07.2019 was issued fixing provisional fee for the session 2019-2020 and in the order, the tuition fee fixed previously i.e. Rs 8.5 lakh per year fee was confirmed as the fee for the interim period for 2019-2020 as well.

Challenging the Government Orders dated 14.07.2017 and 01.07.2019, the college filed a plea, which was later withdrawn by the college. Later, the college preferred statutory appeal under Section 11 of the Act, 2006 before the Appellate Authority along with delay condonation application. Thereafter, the college again approached the High Court by filing another plea on the pretext of the Appellate Authority not functioning. Later, this plea was also dismissed for want of prosecution.

Meanwhile, the Appellate Authority proceeded with the appeal of the college and allowed it by an order dated 24.10.024, which was challenged by the petitioners in this case.

Challenging the order, the counsel for the petitioners argued that once the petition filed by the college was dismissed as withdrawn without any leave of the Court to pursue any other remedy, the appeal of the college was not maintainable considering the fact that the prayer made in the plea was identical to the prayer made in the appeal.

The counsel further argued that the College was also guilty of concealing the material fact before the Appellate Authority in not disclosing the first petition and the order of dismissal passed on that petition. He contended that during the pendency of the appeal, the college filed another petition seeking same prayer which was made in the earlier plea.

Accordingly, it was contended that the proceeding before the Appellate Authority submitted by the College was nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court and it was sufficient cause to dismiss the appeal.

The petitioners' counsel further contended that once the Session had commenced and the petitioners had paid the fees as demanded by the College, any variation or enhancement in the fee structure would prejudice the petitioners. Further, he argued that once the final fee for Session 2019-2020 had been fixed by the Government Order dated 14.07.2017, any variation in such fee would obviously prejudice the rights of the petitioners.

On the other hand, the counsel for the authorities submitted that in the Government Order dated 22.09.2016, the fee for Session 2016-2017 was fixed as Rs 11,30,000 and therefore, in view of such fact, once for Session 2016-2017, the fee was Rs 11,30,000, there was no justification for reducing the fee for the subsequent Sessions i.e. 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 fixing the fee as Rs 8,50,000. In this regard, the counsel argued that since the fee was not fixed as per The Uttar Pradesh Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006, the Appellate Authority rightly referred the matter back to the Competent Authority i.e. Fee Fixation Committee who is empowered to determine the fee.

While considering the matter, the Court slammed the college for filing identical petitions without disclosing it before the Court. It noted,

"The filing of two writ petitions for the same cause of action with identical prayer without disclosing the same before the Appellate Authority, in the opinion of the Court, is an act of gross negligence on the part of the College and an abuse of process of law. Had the College disclosed about filing of the writ petitions and the order passed in the said writ petitions, perhaps the Appellate Authority would not have entertained the appeal for the reason that two writ petitions for the same relief which have been prayed for before the Appellate Authority, have been dismissed, and therefore, this Court does not appreciate the conduct of the College in misusing the process of law to its advantage."

"From the aforesaid facts, it can be safely culled out that it is a case of concealment of fact and misuse of process of law by the respondent-College in filing the appeal when two writ petitions i.e. Writ-C No.2587 of 2019 and Writ-C No.23942 of 2019 have already been dismissed by this Court for the same relief without any liberty to avail any other remedy in law," it further noted.

Regarding the undertaking given by some students agreeing to pay the increased fee, which was submitted by the college's counsel, the Court noted,

"The petitioners are the students and have qualified after their best effort in the NEET Examination, and thereafter, they had undergone counseling and got admission. After a rigorous process of admission, the petitioners got admission in M.B.B.S., therefore, the petitioners had no option but to give undertaking as demanded by the respondent College as they were in fear of loosing admission in case they do not furnish the undertaking demanded by the College. Therefore, in such circumstances, undertaking given by the students in the opinion of the Court is not given out of their free will but under a fear of loosing admission in M.B.B.S. Course which they have obtained after clearing a rigorous process of admission."

"Even all the students have not given undertaking as in the instant case, it is admitted by the respondents that the petitioner nos. 3, 32, 33, 35 & 42 have not given any undertaking. In view of the fact that the respondent College has not taken undertaking from all the students, the respondent College cannot act arbitrarily and discriminate the identically placed students, therefore, the principle of estoppel as claimed by the respondent College is not applicable in the fats of the present case," it further observed.

Further noted that the students paid more fees than what was claimed by the College in the appeal, the HC observed that the order was not sustained. Accordingly, the Court opined that the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority is not sustainable and is hereby set aside.

"The respondent College is restrained from raising any enhanced fee from the petitioners... Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with no order as to costs," the Court mentioned in the order.

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/krishna-mohan-medical-college-fee-fixation-275435.pdf

Also Read: Overnight 35 percent MBBS Fee Hike! Mathura's Medical College order sparks controversy