Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2166 (MAD)

R. Preethy v. Secretary to Government Chennai

2013-06-24

P.R.SHIVAKUMAR

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner was the District topper of Vellore District in the Higher Secondary (XII) examination conducted by the Department of Government Examinations, Chennai in March 2003. She had secured 1172 out of 1200 marks and stood first in the Vellore District. The Government have introduced a scheme providing educational concession /merit scholarship for the first two rank holders of the State and the first rank holder of the District for pursuing their higher studies. In this regard, the latest G.O issued by the Government is G.O.Ms. No.89, School Education (V1) Department dated 20.05.2003. The petitioner joined M.B.B.S Course in PSG Institute of Medical Sciences and Research on being allotted a seat in the said college. 2. Admittedly, the said college is a self-financed college and the course is also a self financed course. According to the petitioner, she paid tuition fees, uniform charges, university registration fee, book fees, exam fees and other fees including mess deposit and mess fees for the academic years 2003-2004, 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 as follows: Letters were addressed by the third respondent to the first respondent on 09.03.2006 and 15.03.2006 recommending the release of Rs.1,39,000/- and Rs.1,35,000/-respectively as educational concession / merit scholarship to the petitioner for academic years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 respectively. The second respondent has also addressed a letter dated 27.03.2007 recommending award of scholarship to the petitioner for the above said academic years. However, only a sum of Rs.8,093/- was paid to the petitioner by way of a cheque dated 28.03.2007 on the premise that she was entitled to concession/scholarship only to the extent of an amount prescribed as fees for the colleges run by the Government, a fixed fee as book allowance and a fixed fee per month for hostel accommodation. 3. Aggrieved by the same and claiming that the petitioner is entitled to full reimbursement of the fees paid to the institution for the years 2003 -2004, 2004-2005 and 2005 – 2006 and the succeeding years for her pursuit of M.B.B.S course in PSG Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Coimbatore, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus incorporating a direction to the respondents to release allowable educational concession/ merit scholarship to the petitioner for the above mentioned academic years. 4. 4. The claim of the petitioner is resisted by the respondents based on the counter affidavit filed by the second and third respondents on behalf of all the respondents. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have admitted the fact that the petitioner got first rank in Vellore District in the Higher Secondary (XII) Public examination conducted in March 2003. They have also admitted the fact that the Government order issued in G.O.Ms.No.89, Education dated 20.06.2003, is the latest G.O dealing with the policy of the Government for reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the students who have secured the first and second ranks in the State level and first rank in the District level. According to the averments made in the counter affidavit, the petitioner was entitled to: a) the refund of the tuition fee and special fee equivalent to the one fixed for the courses in the Government colleges; b) book allowance and c) fixed hostel fee. Due to want of clarification, initially a sum of Rs.8903/- was paid as adhoc payment on 28.03.2007. Subsequently, the eligible fees paid by the petitioner were reimbursed as detailed below: It is the contention made by the respondents that since a total sum of Rs.63,105/-, being the eligible amount for the academic years 2003-2004, 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, was paid as per the Government Orders, the petitioner's claim for payment of the actual fee paid by her in the self-financed college is liable to be rejected and the writ petition seeking mandamus directing the respondents to release the amount as educational concession/scholarship to the District topper is bound to be dismissed. 5. The arguments advanced by Mr.T.M.Hariharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mr.M.S.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents were heard. The materials placed before this Court by the parties were also perused. This Court paid its anxious consideration to the said materials and the arguments advanced on both sides. 6. 5. The arguments advanced by Mr.T.M.Hariharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mr.M.S.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents were heard. The materials placed before this Court by the parties were also perused. This Court paid its anxious consideration to the said materials and the arguments advanced on both sides. 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department ,dated 17.11.2000, the petitioner is entitled to the full reimbursement of the tuition fee and other compulsory fees paid to the institution despite the fact that she had joined the M.B.B.S course in a self-financed college, since she had got admission in the self-financed college, namely PSG Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, through the Single Window System by which seats are allotted to the candidates. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Government Order does not make any distinction between the students pursuing their studies in the Government colleges and aided colleges and the students pursuing their studies in self-financed colleges; that when no such classification has been made in the Government Order and the terms of Government Order are general in nature to the effect that the rank holders shall be entitled to the reimbursement of the tuition fee and other fees besides merit scholarship, the denial of such benefit by restricting it to the extent of the amount charged as fees in the Government colleges or aided colleges, shall be quite unreasonable and that it shall offend the constitutional protection conferred by Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 7. Per contra, learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that in order to achieve uniformity in awarding concessions and payment of scholarships to the meritorious students, the Government thought it fit to fix the ceiling of such concession and scholarship on par with the fee payable in the Government colleges and aided colleges and that the same was done in order to rectify the anomaly of an affluent student getting admission in a self-financial college paying higher amount as tuition fee and other fees, whereas a poor meritorious student will have to be content with the facilities available in the Government colleges or aided colleges. It is the further contention raised by the learned Additional Government Pleader that since there was an anomaly and the Government faced difficulties in applying G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department, dated 17.11.2000, by which the fixed amount of scholarship for various course was revised and direction was issued for reimbursing the fees paid by such students (rank holders), it became necessary and the Government thought it fit to issue an order in G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education (V1) Department dated 20.05.2003 amending G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000; that by G.O.Ms.89, School Education Department dated 20.05.2003, clauses 2 and 3 in the earlier Government Order, namely G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000, came to be amended by fixing a cap on the concession restricting the concession to the extent of the fees fixed for the students pursuing their studies in the Government Colleges and that in view of the passing of G.O.Ms.89, School Education Department dated 20.05.2003, the present claim made by the petitioner in the present writ petition is bound to be rejected. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000, has contended that as per clauses 2 and 3 of the said Government Order, the petitioner is entitled to the reimbursement of the total amount of tuition fee paid by the petitioner as per the condition incorporated in the said clauses, since she had got admitted in P S G Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore for the M.B.B.S course through single window system and that the denial of such a benefit or restriction of the concession shall be against the spirit of the said Government Order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the state level rank holders and the District Level rank holders pursuing their higher studies in the engineering colleges are getting reimbursement of the entire amount of tuition fee paid by them since the fee has been prescribed by the committee appointed by the Government; that the denial of such a concession to the petitioner for pursuing a professional course, namely M.B.B.S course, shall be obviously against the spirit of the above said Government order and that hence the respondents should be directed to allow educational concession/merit scholarship to the extent of the tuition fee and other fees paid by the petitioner to the institution in which she was studying. 9. 9. The above said contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has been refuted by the learned Additional Government Pleader who has stated that the said argument on behalf of the petitioner was advanced in ignorance of the change in the scheme brought about by G.O.Ms.89, School Education Department dated 20.05.2003 restricting the concession to the extent of the fee levied in the Government colleges. Though the petitioner has referred to G.O.Ms.89, School Education Department dated 20.05.2003 in her affidavit for claiming concession by way of reimbursement of the fee paid to the college and for claiming scholarship, it is obvious that the reference to the said Government Order was made without even understanding the fact that the said Government order came to be passed for restricting the concession to the extent of the amount levied as fees in the Government colleges to achieve uniformity. In fact, the petitioner has not chosen to produce the copy of the said Government Order, even though she has stated in the affidavit that she understands that the Government has issued the said Government order regarding educational concession/merit scholarship for the district topper for pursuing higher education. On the other hand, the petitioner has produced only the following documents: 1. Copy of her representation dated 18.11.2005 sent to the 3rd respondent . 2. Copy of the certificate dated 19.11.2005 showing the fee collected from the petitioner for the years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 issued by P S G Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Coimbatore. 3. Copy of the letter of the third respondent dated 09.03.2006 addressed to the second respondent recommending reimbursement of a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- towards tuition fee. 4. Copy of the letter of the third respondent dated 14.03.2006 addressed to the second respondent recommending reimbursement of a sum of Rs.1,39,000/- to the petitioner for the year 2003 – 2004 and Rs.1,35,000/- to the petitioner for the year 2004 – 2005; and 5. Copy of the letter of the second respondent dated 27.03.2007 addressed to the first respondent. 10. In the said letter dated 27.03.2007 (cited 5th above) the second respondent has recited the fact that the fee concession had been restricted by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 to the amount collected as tuition fee in the Government colleges. Copy of the letter of the second respondent dated 27.03.2007 addressed to the first respondent. 10. In the said letter dated 27.03.2007 (cited 5th above) the second respondent has recited the fact that the fee concession had been restricted by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 to the amount collected as tuition fee in the Government colleges. However, after such recital, the second respondent has chosen to state that the fees fixed by the permanent committee for various course was directed to be applied from 2004-2005; that hence from the Academic year 2004-2005, the amount fixed by the permanent committee should be reimbursed as fee concession and that in this regard, a Government Order to that effect was desirable. 11. From a proper reading of the G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003, it is found that the concession was restricted to the amount collected by the Government colleges to achieve uniformity in the rate of concessions. The said letter of the second respondent dated 27.03.2007 made only a recommendation to the Government for raising the cap provided by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 and extending the concession upto the amount fixed by the permanent committee. There is nothing to show that the recommendation of the second respondent was accepted by the Government and any Government Order was passed further amending G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000 which stands amended by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003. As per the said Government Order prescribing concession, the petitioner is entitled to have a concession regarding tuition fees only to the extent of the amount collected by the Government colleges as tuition fee. 12. Normally the rank holders with high cut off marks will try to get admission in the medical colleges run by the Government. If such persons omit to avail the facilities available in the Government medical colleges and choose to get admitted in self-financed colleges by making payment of a higher amount as tuition fee since such students would be in a position to afford to pay such higher amount, the same would give an impression that the education imparted in the Government colleges are inferior to one imparted in the private self-financed colleges. Even if it is assumed that the same shall be true, then a poor student who has got first or second rank in the state level or the first rank in the district level cannot pursue his/her studies in self-financed colleges because of the heavy cost involved in it and he/she has to be content with pursuing his/her studies in the Government colleges. If the affluent students who get admission in the private self-financed colleges are allowed full reimbursement of the tuition fee, it shall result in an anomaly of a topper, who is poor, getting a fee concession of a lesser amount since the amount collected in the Government colleges shall be lesser and an affluent topper getting a fee concession to a larger extent as the fee paid in the self-financed colleges shall be at a higher level. Only in order to avoid such anomaly G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 came to be passed and by the said Government Order uniformity has been achieved. Now the recommendation of the second respondent made in his letter dated 27.03.2007 to the third respondent seeking issuance of a fresh Government Order alone shall not confer any right on the petitioner to seek concession disregarding the limitation prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003. In the unamended G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000, the following concessions had been announced:- 1. Students who join in aided colleges are entitled to full reimbursement of the fee fixed for such colleges including special fee. 2. Students who get admitted in the Government aided colleges or self-financed colleges in professional course through the Single Window System of admission conducted by the Government shall be entitled to the reimbursement of the amount fixed by the Government. 3. Those who get admission in self-financed colleges otherwise than under the Single Window System, will be entitled to reimbursement of the fee subject to the condition that the same shall be restricted to the amount fixed by the Government . 13. 3. Those who get admission in self-financed colleges otherwise than under the Single Window System, will be entitled to reimbursement of the fee subject to the condition that the same shall be restricted to the amount fixed by the Government . 13. For better appreciation, the unamended clauses 2 and 3 of the G.O is reproduced: "2/ “TAMIL” 3/ “TAMIL” The above said clauses were capable of being interpreted to mean that a student (topper) getting admission in a self-financed college either through the Single Window System or otherwise shall be entitled to reimbursement of the tuition fee to the extent of the amount fixed by the Government as tuition fee for such college. At the time of passing of the said Government Order, no fee had been prescribed for various courses by the Government. Only at a later point of time, permanent committee for fixing the fees for various professional courses came to be appointed and the fees came to be fixed and published. The fixation of different fees for Government Quota and management quota would not have been contemplated at the time of passing of G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000. Only in 2003, when fees came to be fixed by the permanent committee, the Government thought it fit to bring about uniformity by issuing G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 amending G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000 to restrict the concession to the amount fixed as fee for such courses in the Government colleges. The contents of G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003 in vernacular are as follows: “TAMIL” After such amendment, clauses 2 and 3 of G.O.Ms.No.286, School Education Department dated 17.11.2000 stand as follows: 2. Those, who get admitted in Government aided colleges and self-financed colleges through Single Window System of admission conducted by the Government, shall be reimbursed an amount fixed for such course in the Government colleges. 3. Those who get admitted otherwise than under the Single Window System, shall also be reimbursed with the tuition fee including special fee restricting it to the fee fixed for such course in the Government colleges. From the same it shall be abundantly clear that by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003, an upper ceiling has been fixed for fee concession in the form of reimbursement taking the fees fixed for such courses in the Government Colleges as the limit. From the same it shall be abundantly clear that by G.O.Ms.No.89, School Education Department dated 20.06.2003, an upper ceiling has been fixed for fee concession in the form of reimbursement taking the fees fixed for such courses in the Government Colleges as the limit. When such is the case, the present contention of the petitioner that she is entitled to reimbursement of the full amount of fees paid by her to the self-financed college in which she pursued her M.B.B.S course, shall be quite contrary to the spirit of the said Government Order and hence the claim of the petitioner is liable to be rejected. 14. For all the reasons stated above, this Court comes to the conclusion that there is no merit in the writ petition and the writ petition deserves dismissal. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.