JUDGMENT : N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J. This writ petition is filed questioning Government Order No. 520-Edu of 2013 dated 7-5-2013 and Government Order No. 344 Edu of 2015 dated 21-7-2015 constituting a Committee for fixation of fee structure of private unaided educational institutions and for direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the issue relating to charging of fee for the months of September/October, 2014 after hearing the schools and representatives and to find out as to which of the schools suffered floods, the time duration and the percentage of the fee to be deducted for two months and allow other schools which do not suffer floods to charge fee for these two months in the same manner as it was being charged previously and for direction to determine the fee hike, within one month as also the date from which the same would become applicable and direct the respondents to allow the participation of representative of the petitioner association in Fee Fixation Committee. 2. Prayer numbers (b), (c) and (d) can be considered only if prayer (a) is negatived. According to the petitioner, there are two associations of private unaided schools and the petitioner association is having total 330 members. The other Association is having membership of 40-50 members. According to petitioner, the total number of unaided schools in the State of J&K is around 2500 and approximately about 600 schools are in the process of registration/affiliation. Majority of these schools provide education up to 5th standard. Some of the schools provide education up to 8th standard. The schools offering education up to 10th and 12th standard is around 612 and 85 respectively. The total number of students studying in these schools is approximately 6 lacs and the number of teaching and non-teaching staff in these schools approximately is 54,000. There are different types of schools depending on the infrastructure, teaching facilities, and the salary paid to the staff. In some of the schools the salary of the teaching staff varies between Rs. 4000/- to Rs. 50000/- per month. Similarly for non-teaching staff the salary ranges from Rs. 4000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per month. 3. The Jammu and Kashmir Education Act is governing the administration of schools. In the year 2002 the previous Act was repealed and the Jammu and Kashmir School Education Act 2002 came into force and Rules were framed by SRO 123 dated 18-3-2010. Similarly for non-teaching staff the salary ranges from Rs. 4000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per month. 3. The Jammu and Kashmir Education Act is governing the administration of schools. In the year 2002 the previous Act was repealed and the Jammu and Kashmir School Education Act 2002 came into force and Rules were framed by SRO 123 dated 18-3-2010. According to the petitioner the said Act and Rules no where contemplates constitution of the fee fixation committee though Rule 9 deals with levy and collection of fee. When Government Order No. 530 Edu of 2013 dated 7-5-2013 was issued constituting the Fee Fixation Committee, a writ petition was filed in OWP No. 1182/2013 by the Jammu and Kashmir unaided private schools co-ordination committee and the said writ petition was dismissed as not pressed on 1-6-2015. Immediately after September 2014 floods, a public interest litigation in PIL No. 12/2014 was filed contending that in spite of closure of schools due to floods the schools are collecting fee and an interim order was passed not to collect fee from the students for the months of September and October, 2014. The said writ petition was finally disposed of on 1-6-2015 holding that the Fee Committee being functional, the managements can approach the said committee to clear the issue regarding the functioning of schools during September and October, 2014 and after getting permission they can collect the fee if the schools were really functional. The terms and conditions for the Chairman and Members of the Fee Fixation Committee were also issued by Government Order No. 369 Edu of 2015 dated 28-7-2015. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though management of schools approached the Fee Fixation Committee to prove the factum of functioning of their schools during September and October, 2014, the 2nd respondent-Committee has not decided as to which of the schools functioned during September and October, 2014 as the flood has not affected these schools and without clearing the permission sought for to collect fee to such of those schools which were functional during those two months, these schools are prevented from collecting the fee from the students. It is also the contention of the petitioner that several schools have approached the Committee to re-fix the fee structure but the 2nd respondent/Committee is not deciding the same and the schools are unable to collect the genuine fee to manage the expenses of paying salary and for improving the facilities and infrastructure of the schools. Incidentally the constitution of School Fee Fixation Committee is also challenged by raising various grounds. 5. Mr. Jehangir Iqbal Ganai, the learned Advocate General though raised a preliminary objection with regard to the status of the petitioner which is an un-registered body, to maintain the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner took time to verify and report as to whether the petitioner-association has registered itself or not. No such proof is filed before this Court despite granting several adjournments right from 8-6-2016. 6. Without reference to the said preliminary objection this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of in view of the settled legal position on the issue raised in prayer (a). Hence this Court is inclined to decide the matter on merits. 7. The Committee for fixation of fee structure of unaided private schools was constituted by Government in terms of the order of this Court in PIL No. 9719/2009 dated 16-5-2013 as well as the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2003) 6 SCC 697 : ( AIR 2003 SC 3724 ) (Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka). The said reasons are stated in Government Order No. 520-Edu of 2013 dated 7-5-2013. The Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case, reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481 : ( AIR 2003 SC 355 ) (T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka) held that even though right to establish and manage educational institutions is regarded as an occupation which is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has cautioned such educational institutions not to indulge in profiteering and commercialisation. It was held that commercialisation and exploitation is not permissible while running educational institutions as they are supposed to run on no profit no loss basis. It was also pointed out that the cost of education may vary from institution to institution depending upon variable factors, the same shall be taken into account while fixing the fee. It was held that commercialisation and exploitation is not permissible while running educational institutions as they are supposed to run on no profit no loss basis. It was also pointed out that the cost of education may vary from institution to institution depending upon variable factors, the same shall be taken into account while fixing the fee. The fee to be charged would take care of various expenses incurred by these educational institutions plus provision for the expansion of education for future generations. However, unreasonable demand cannot be made from the present students and their parents. The said position was reiterated in a subsequent decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697 : ( AIR 2003 SC 3724 ) (Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka) and (2005) 6 SCC 537 : ( AIR 2005 SC 3226 ) (P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra). 8. The contention of the petitioner is that nowhere in the J&K School Education Act, 2002 or the Rules framed thereunder the State is empowered to constitute a Committee to determine the fee structure of unaided private schools. 9. To answer the said issue it is to be noted that all the schools, either aided or unaided, shall be recognised under the J&K School Education Act, 2002 by the Government. Section 3 of the Act specifically states that the provisions of the said Act shall apply to all the schools in the State. Establishment of private schools is permitted under Section 5(b). Section 11 mandates that no private school shall be established, run or maintained without permission in writing of the Government or the competent authority and the Government shall prescribe the procedure to be followed for the grant of permission to establish, run or maintain private schools. Section 12 deals with recognition of private schools which states that only such private schools as are recognised shall be permitted to function. Section 12(4) states that Government shall prescribe norms and conditions for the functioning of the recognised schools. Thus the Government is empowered to prescribe norms and conditions for functioning of the recognised schools which include constitution of a Committee to fix the fee structure. 10. A similar issue arose before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the decision, reported in (2004) 5 SCC 583 : ( AIR 2004 SC 2236 ) (Modern School v. Union of India). Thus the Government is empowered to prescribe norms and conditions for functioning of the recognised schools which include constitution of a Committee to fix the fee structure. 10. A similar issue arose before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the decision, reported in (2004) 5 SCC 583 : ( AIR 2004 SC 2236 ) (Modern School v. Union of India). A plea was raised stating that the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 having not contemplated creation of school fee determination Committee, the Delhi High Court was wrong in constituting a committee headed by a former Judge. The said contention was negatived by Hon'ble the Supreme Court by majority judgment with reference to Section 18 of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 upholding the order of the Delhi High Court. While answering the question as to whether the educational institutions are entitled to fix their own fee structure, it was held that there could be no rigid fee structure and each institute must have freedom to fix its own fee structure after taking into account the need to generate funds to run the institution and to provide facilities necessary for the benefit of the students. It was further held that fee structure must be fixed keeping in mind the infrastructure and facilities available, investment made, salaries paid to teachers and staff, future plans for expansion and or betterment of institution subject to two restrictions, namely, non-profiteering and non-charging of capitation fees. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noticed that there were various statutes/regulations which govern the fixation of fee and Hon'ble the Supreme Court directed the respective State Governments to set up a Committee headed by a retired High Court Judge to approve the fee structure or to propose some other fee which could be charged by each unaided institutions. 11. Thus it is evident that the committee for fixing the fee structure created by the Government through Government Order No. 520-Edu of 2013 dated 7-5-2013 is in tune with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is binding on the State Government under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. 11. Thus it is evident that the committee for fixing the fee structure created by the Government through Government Order No. 520-Edu of 2013 dated 7-5-2013 is in tune with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is binding on the State Government under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Further in the Government order constituting the Fee Fixation Committee itself the order passed by this Court is referred, namely, PIL No. 719/2009 wherein the parents co-ordination committee and others prayed for constitution of Fee Committee to fix the fee for unaided private educational institutions and the Division Bench on 16-5-2013 directed the Government to constitute the Fee Committee and ordered the learned Advocate General to file the compliance report. Pursuant to the said directions issued, compliance report was filed by the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, constituting the Committee for fixation of fee structure of private educational institutions in the State in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697 : ( AIR 2003 SC 3724 ) (Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka). A statement was made by the learned Advocate General that all facilities in the shape of office, infrastructure and other secretarial assistance would be provided to the Committee within two weeks and the Division Bench recorded its hope that the Committee will start functioning at the earliest. Thus it is evident that the Committee constituted, which is under challenge, was pursuant to the direction issued by this Court and so long as the said direction was not challenged, the implementation of the order cannot be challenged which is the effect of the prayer made in this writ petition, namely, prayer (a). 12. It is also to be noted at this juncture that by constituting the Fee Committee the right to administer is not affected in any manner. The Fee Fixation Committee is constituted to find out as to whether the proposed fee hike is justified or not. If sufficient reasons are stated and the Fee Committee is convinced for the hike in fee, the Committee is expected to approve the same as the reason behind the constitution of the committee is to prevent profiteering and commercialisation of education at the school level. 13. If sufficient reasons are stated and the Fee Committee is convinced for the hike in fee, the Committee is expected to approve the same as the reason behind the constitution of the committee is to prevent profiteering and commercialisation of education at the school level. 13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in (2016) 7 SCC 353 : ( AIR 2016 SC 2601 ) (Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh) has held that though the private unaided minority and non-minority educational institutions have a right to occupation under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, the said right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions and for the larger public interest of student community, the State can monitor the fee structure to be charged from the students. Thus the constitution of the Committee to fix the fee structure is within the regulatory measures and cannot be treated as restrictive measure of the Government in running the administration of schools. 14. That being the position, the petitioner association is not entitled to challenge the constitution of the Committee for fixing the fee structure in unaided educational institutions. 15. Apart from that, even in the pleadings it is mentioned that same Government Order was challenged on earlier occasion by filing OWP No. 1182/2013 and the said writ petition was dismissed as not pressed on 1-6-2015. Further in PIL No. 12/2014 consent was given by the petitioner as well as the institutions to go before the Committee to establish the fact of functioning of the schools during September/October, 2014. Hence the first prayer made by the petitioner is unsustainable as the Fee Fixation Committee was constituted for implementing the directions issued by Hon'ble the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. 16. Insofar as the prayer seeking direction to 2nd respondent to decide the issue relating to charging of fee by the schools for the months of September/October, 2014 is concerned, there cannot be any impediment to decide the same by the 2nd respondent, provided individual school managements have filed applications with proof that said school/schools functioned during September/October, 2014 and were not closed due to floods. On recording satisfaction based on the materials filed or to be filed by the respective school management/managements, the 2nd respondent is bound to consider the said aspect and give a finding with regard to the functioning or non-functioning of such schools during September/October, 2014 and if it is established that the school/schools functioned, those schools should be permitted to collect the fee from the students for those two months i.e. September and October, 2014. 17. Insofar as the direction to the 2nd respondent to determine the issue of fee hike is concerned, such of those schools which have filed applications with documents in support of their proposed hike, the said applications are bound to be considered by the 2nd respondent in a pragmatic manner keeping in mind the parameters mentioned by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, namely, infrastructure and facilities available, investment made, salaries paid to teachers and staff, future plans for expansion and or betterment of institution etc. The 2nd respondent cannot shirk its responsibility on this aspect and if there is any delay in deciding any application seeking enhancement of fee, it is well open to the said institute to approach this Court for seeking appropriate direction which would be considered with all seriousness. 18. Insofar as the prayer seeking direction to allow the participation of representative of the petitioner association in the Fee Fixation Committee, the same is without any rhyme or reason. Individual school has to justify the enhancement of fee depending upon the above said requirements. It cannot be said that mere presence of the representative of the petitioner-association will facilitate determination of correct fee structure as the individual managements of the schools can put forward their claims and justify the enhancement of fee and it is for the fee determining committee, which is headed by an eminent person, namely, a former Judge of this Court assisted by experts in education field would be in a position to decide the same. Hence the said prayer is also rejected. 19. In fine the prayers (a) and (d) are rejected and prayers (b) and (c) are disposed of with directions to the Fix Fixation Committee as stated supra. No costs.