Doctor's exam fee dispute: Madras HC flags demands beyond committee approved rates, warns medical college of tax exemption review
Madras High Court
Chennai: Taking note of the demands for an additional fee above the limits fixed by the fee committee, the Madras High Court recently warned Sri Venkateshwara Medical College Hospital and Research Centre in Puducherry that it would issue directions to the Income Tax Authorities to evaluate the withdrawal of income-tax exemptions granted to the institute.
The Madras High Court issued this direction while considering a plea moved by a doctor seeking direction to the college to accept her examination fee, issue a hall ticket to her, and allow her to appear in the September 2026 examination, and consequently, direct the medical college to conduct the petitioner's practical examination in another institution.
Case Background:
According to the case details, the petitioner studied the Post Graduate Course in MS (O&G) and joined the course in 2017 and completed it in 2020. Though she appeared for the examination in 2020, her results were not declared due to the pendency of the plea before the Supreme Court.
Subsequently, the Apex Court passed an order dated 01.12.2025, and her results were declared. However, the petitioner was informed that she had failed the examination and therefore, she sought to appear for the supplementary examination scheduled in September 2026. As she was required to pay the examination fee for obtaining the hall ticket, the petitioner attempted to do so. However, the college allegedly declined to receive the examination fee and issue the hall ticket.
When the petitioner-doctor submitted a representation to the Pondicherry University, it sent a letter directing the medical college to receive the fees. However, the medical college refused to receive the fees paid by the student. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the plea before the High Court.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner failed in both the practical and theory examinations, she had already filed a plea for revaluation. However, the supplementary examination is scheduled on 15th September 2026, and the college has, so far, not accepted the examination fees.
Observations by the High Court:
Taking note of the submissions, the HC bench observed, "This Court takes due note of the peculiar and distressing circumstances under which the petitioner has been marked as failed in both the theory and practical examinations."
The Court observed that the petitioner has already filed a separate plea seeking revaluation of her theory and practical papers and requesting the deputation of an external examiner from a different institute. "...appropriate orders shall be passed separately in that matter," observed the Court.
Meanwhile, the Court allowed the petitioner to remit the exam fees directly to the University and ordered, "In the interim, liberty is granted to the petitioner to remit the examination fees directly to the 1st respondent-University, in view of the 2nd respondent-College’s refusal to accept the same. The 1st respondent-University is hereby directed to receive the said examination fee forthwith."
The bench also took note of the fact that the college was collecting fee above and over the fee structure fixed by the fee committee. In this regard, the bench observed, "Prima facie, it appears that the 2nd respondent has refused to accept the examination fee solely because the petitioner resisted making demands for additional payments over and above the fee structure fixed by the Fee Committee. This conduct strongly indicates that the 2nd respondent is not carrying out educational activities in alignment with the objectives of the Trust or Society under which it is registered; instead, it appears to be operating a commercial business for profit."
Warning of an IT probe against the medical college, the bench comprising Justice Krishnan Ramasamy ordered, "In such circumstances, this Court is constrained to look deeper into the matter. To that end, appropriate orders shall be passed to implead the competent Income Tax Authorities to evaluate the withdrawal of the income-tax exemptions granted to the institution, and further directions shall be considered to order the University to withdraw its affiliation."
"With regard to the aforementioned aspects, appropriate orders shall be passed after hearing the 2nd respondent-College," the bench stated.
Regarding the issue of revaluation of papers and the conduct of the practical examinations, the HC bench ordered that "the same shall be conducted in the 1st respondentUniversity alone. The examiner for the said process shall be appointed only in consultation with the Directorate of Medical Education."
To view the order, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/2026/09/11/-pondicherry-university-475148.pdf
