IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2009 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 37012 of 2008(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. THUSHARA V.V.(MINOR), REPRESENTED BY PURUSHOTHAMAN, CHANDROTH, VIDHYANAGA P.O., KASARGODE. 2. SREELEKSHMI.P (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY K.K.CHANDRAN, SARASWATHI, PALLIKKUNNU P.O. KANNUR -670 004. 3. MAYOOKH CHANDRA (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY Y.K.PREMACHANDRAN, PUTHUKUDIL HOUSE, PATTIAM, P.O.PATHAYAKKUNNU -670 691. 4. ANJU.J.(MINOR), REPRESENTED BY O.M.JANARDHANAN, ANDOL, P.O.KARIMANDALAM, VIA.NILESHWAR, DISTRICT KASARGODE -670 314. 5. MADHURIMA.S (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY K.V.SASIDHARAN, SREE SAILAM, MELE CHOVVA, KANNUR-6. 6. VANISREE.C (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY C.UMAPATHI "JAYAMAHAL", N/R COURT, P.O.MATTANUR -670 702, KANNUR DISTRICT. 7. ROSHINA (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY JAYARAJAN.A.K., KRISHNAPADMAM, PUZHATHI, P.O.CHIRAKKAL, KANNUR- 670 011. 8. DHIRAJ VISHNU (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY SEDUMADHAVAN.P, HOUSE NO.2, AMBELARY APARTMENTS, KALPETTA. 9. SABILA.P. (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY P.BALAN, SABILA BHAVAN, KOOVODE, P.O.KUTTIKKAD, VIA. TALIPPARAMBA, KANNUR. W.P.(C). NO.37012/2008-F: 10. ANEESA HASSAN (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY KUNHAMINA HASSAN, 'RAAHA', FAROOQUE NAGAR, MANNA-TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 11. ANU PRIYA.K.(MINOR), REPRESENTED BY C.GOVINDAN, "ANUGRAH", KOTTAM, P.O.MUNDALUR, KANNUR -670 622. 12. JITHYA.A, (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY K.V.SASIDHARAN, 'RAMAPURAM', (NEAR) LIONS CLUB, THAYINERI, PAYYANNUR- 670 307. 13. DEEPTHI RAMAKRISHNAN (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY RAMAKRISHNAN M.K., 'CHETHANA', PALLIKUNNU P.O., KANNUR-4. 14. SHYAM (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY SREEDHARAN NAIR K.P., KANDATHIPARAMBU, EDAMAD P.O., PALAI, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 15. AMBILI VIJAYAKUMAR (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY M.V.VIJAYAKUMAR, 'ANJALI' WEAVERS STREET, P.O.KARIVELLUR -670 521, KANNUR DISTRICT. 16. VIJITHA.K., (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY E.VIJAYAN, 'SOUPARNIKA HOUSE', PARAMPATH, EDAL P.O., PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 17. JAYESH PRAKASH (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY JAYAPRAKASH, 'PRANAVAM', MEZHUVELLI P.O., ARANMULA. 18. VAISALY.S, (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY M.N.SUKRUTHAMANIAMMA, MUTTATHU HOUSE, KALATHOOR POST, KURAVILANGUR -686 633. BY ADV. MR.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ENTRANCE COMMISSIONER, O/O.COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. W.P.(C). NO.37012/2008-F: 3. THE FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES, RAM MOHAN PALACE, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE KERALA STATE INDIAN SYSTEMS OF SELF FINANCING COLLEGE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, DR.HAREENDRAN NAIR, C/O.PARASSINIKADAVU AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE, KANNUR. 5. PARASSINIKADAVU AYURVEDA MEDICAL COLLEGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, PARASSINIKADAVU -670563. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. M.A. ASIF, R5 BY ADV. MR.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37012/2008-F: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 17/05/2007 OF THE B.A.M.S COLLEGE, PARASSINIKADAVU. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE FEE RECEIPT DTD. 15/10/2008 OF THE R.5. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R5.A: COPY OF THE ANNUAL FEE STRUCTURE FOR VARIOUS COURSES IN B.A.M.S COURSE. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.GIRI, J ....................... W.P.(C).37012/2008 ....................... Dated this the 10th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners are studying for the 2nd year BAMS Course at Parassinikadavu Ayurveda Medical College. They got admission for the year 2007-08. An amount of Rs.50,000/- was collected from these students by the 5th respondent. Going by the prospectus issued by the Management produced as Ext.R5(a), they had indicated that a fees of Rs.1,25,000/- would be payable for the BAMS Course. Petitioners contend that they were accommodated against the Management seats, pursuant to a seat sharing agreement entered into between the Government as also the Management. But the principal grievance is that they are now being called upon to pay Rs.95,000/- as annual fee whereas the students admitted against the merit seats are called upon to pay only Rs.15,000/- 2. The fee now collected by the Management is W.P.(C).37012/2008 2 on the strength of Ext.P1 agreement between the Government and the Consortium of Management. Ext.P1 agreement has been challenged in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.Krishnamoorthy points out that the agreement is not sourced to any statutory provision. According to the management, Government had taken into account the interest of the students also and had actually scaled down the fee from Rs.1,25,000/- as sought for by the Management to Rs.95,000/- as fixed in Ext.P3. Mr.Swathykumar, learned counsel for the Management contends that fees has been paid by the students voluntarily that they had applied after keeping in mind the fee of Rs.1,25,000/- published by the management in Ext.R5(a). 4. In my view, Section 6 of the Kerala Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of W.P.(C).37012/2008 3 Capitation fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Explorative Fee and other measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006, (Act 19 of 2006), confers power on the Fee Regulatory Committee, the 3rd respondent, to decide the legality and propriety of the fee fixed by the Management and the power available to the Fee Regulatory Committee under Section 6 of the Act is left intact notwithstanding the fact that a Bench of this Court has in Lisie Medical & Educational Institutions v. State of Kerala (2007 (1) KLT 409) declared Section 7 of the Act also dealing with the powers of the Fee Regulatory Committee as unconstitutional and unenforceable. 5. In these circumstances, writ petitioners may approach the Fee Regulatory Committee, the 3rd respondent, with their contentions, that the fee of Rs.95,000/- fixed by the Management and collected by them is highly excessive. If a complaint is filed in this regard, notice shall be issued by the 3rd W.P.(C).37012/2008 4 respondent on the said complaint to the 5th respondent and decision shall be taken by the Fee Regulatory Committee in accordance with law, after hearing both sides within three months from the date of receipt of the complaint. Decision taken by the Fee Regulatory Committee shall thereafter bind the parties. I think it is appropriate to observe that the decision to be taken by the Committee would be the final decision in this regard and the provisions of the Act do not contemplate any interim orders to be passed by the Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Ext.P1 agreement has been challenged in this writ petition. I do not propose to consider those contentions. But it is open to the petitioners to contend before the 3rd respondent that the Committee should take a decision in the matter of deciding on the correctness of the fee fixed by the management, untrammelled by Ext.P1 and in such circumstances, management would be able to contend that Ext.P1 is only one of the materials on the basis of which W.P.(C).37012/2008 5 management has fixed the fee. Ultimately the statutorily empowered Committee shall take a decision in accordance with law. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs