IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 1514 of 2007 Between: 1 Anwar-Ul-Uloom Educational Association, Rep. bys its Secretary, Mahaboob Alam Khan, New Mallepally, 2 Anwar-Ul-Uloom College of Education, Rep. bys its Correspondent, Mahaboob Alam Khan, Malakpet, 3 Mahaboob Alam Khan S/o. Nawab Shah Alam Khan ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Fee Structure Committee, Rep. by its Secretary, First Floor, Gagan Vihar, Nampally,. Hyderabad. 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a "Writ of Mandamus" or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing proceedings in Order No. 619/2006-FFC-2939 dt. 20-12-2006 as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional contrary to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and set aside the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the request of the management of the 2nd petitioner institution individually by considering the application dt. 16-12- 2006 and direct the 1st respondent to forthwith determine the fee structure in respect of the 2nd petitioner institution individually and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR. S.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.1514 OF 2007 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the proceedings dated 20.12.2006 of the 1st respondent – Committee for fixation of fee structure in Private Un-Aided Professional Colleges as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Under the impugned proceedings dated 20.12.2006 the 2nd petitioner college was directed to collect tuition fee from each student at Rs.10,500/- for the academic years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09, whereas the fee proposed by the petitioners was Rs.33,000/- per each student. The impugned order is assailed in this writ petition contending inter alia that the fixation of uniform fee for three years without application of mind to the material placed by each individual institution is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner also sought a direction to the 1st respondent to determine the fee structure in respect of the 2nd petitioner institution individually after considering the material produced by it. Separate counter-affidavits have been filed by the respondents 1 and 2 denying the allegations made by the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without application of mind to the material produced by the petitioner and contending that the fee fixed by the 1st respondent was quite just and reasonable. It is not in dispute that the fee fixed by the 1st respondent has to be in force for three years as laid down by the Supreme Court in ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION v. STATE OF KARNATAKA[1]. Even in the impugned order, it was made clear that the fee structure fixed therein would be for the academic years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. Since the said three academic years have already come to an end, it is not necessary for this Court to go into the merits of the case and express any opinion on the question whether the fee fixed under the impugned proceedings is arbitrary or illegal. Instead the interest of justice would be met if the 1st respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioners for fixation of fresh fee structure for the academic year 2009-10 taking into consideration the fresh proposals that may be made by them. Accordingly, without going into merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application for fixation of fee structure for the petitioner No.2 institution for the academic year 2009-10 onwards. If any such application is made, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders be passed by the 1st respondent in accordance with law keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court in COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY v. THOMAS P. JOHN[2]. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 12–06-2009 Note:- CC in one week. (B/O) gbs [1] (2003) 6 Supreme Court Cases 697 [2] (2008) 8 Supreme Court Cases 82