Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 553 (CAL)

IQ City Foundation v. State of West Bengal

2017-06-19

ARIJIT BANERJEE

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. A memorandum dated 25th January, 2017 issued by the Special Secretary to the Government of West Bengal is under challenge in the present writ application. By the said memo the Special Secretary informed the petitioner institute that on considering the proposal of the revised fee structure of M.B.B.S. students made by the petitioner institute including their representations and submissions made during the course of hearing before the said committee, the Governor has been pleased to accept the recommendation of the said committee. The fee structure which the committee appears to have fixed is indicated in the said memo. There is nothing in the said memo as regards the basis on which the said fee structure was fixed by the committee. No reason for rejecting the proposal of revised fee structures submitted by the petitioner institute finds place in the said memorandum. 2. Mr. Dey, learned senior counsel appearing for the State submitted that the memorandum that is impugned in the present writ application is only a communication of the fixing of the revised fee structure made by the permanent committee. Hence there can be no question of the said memorandum containing any reason. It is a mere intimation to the petitioner institute. 3. I have heard Mr. Sengupta, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dey at length. I am of the view that going by the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court at para 7 of the decision in Islamia Academic’s case, reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697 , the Government has no role to play in the matter of fixing of fees. It is the duty and prerogative of the permanent committee constituted as per directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. No question of the Government accepting the recommendation of the committee can or does arise. The committee’s duty is not to recommend but to fix a fee structure. What I need to say is whether the committee’s order fixing the fee structure is sufficiently supported by reasons. Such order is not before me. Mr. Sengupta, learned senior counsel placed page 322 of the writ petition which is a letter/representation dated 20th March, 2017 addressed to the Hon’ble Minister , Department of Health and Family welfare with copies marked to amongst others, the members of the permanent committee. Such order is not before me. Mr. Sengupta, learned senior counsel placed page 322 of the writ petition which is a letter/representation dated 20th March, 2017 addressed to the Hon’ble Minister , Department of Health and Family welfare with copies marked to amongst others, the members of the permanent committee. In the said letter it was recorded by the petitioner institute that the petitioner institute requested the committee to disclose copies of records of its proceedings. However, till date no such records have been disclosed by the committee, submits learned senior counsel for the petitioner. 4. I am told that notice was given to the members of the committee that the matter would be mentioned today before me in the morning. At the time of mentioning nobody appeared for the members of the committee. Be that as it may, I direct the members of the committee being the respondent nos. 3,4,5 and 6 to produce before this Court the records of the case pertaining to fixing of revised fee structure for the petitioner institute including the final order of the committee, on the next date of hearing. Learned advocate on record for the petitioner shall forthwith communicate this order to the non-appearing respondents. 5. Fix the matter on 22nd June, 2017 at 2.30 p.m.. 6. Let a photostat plain copy of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar be given to the learned counsel for the parties on usual undertakings.