Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 676 (MP)

Joy Senior v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-04-26

VISHAL MISHRA

body2022
JUDGMENT Vishal Mishra, J. - This petition has been filed challenging the show-cause notice dated 21.04.2022 (annexure P-9), issued by the respondent no.3 Collector, Jabalpur on a complaint made by a student with respect to escalation of the fees in violation of the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vidyalaya (Fees Tatha Sambandhit Vishayon Ka Viniyaman) adhiniyam, 2017. It is argued that the notice was issued to the petitioner on earlier occasion on 28.03.2022, which was duly replied by the petitioner. Without considering the submissions and reply filed by the petitioner again a show-cause notice dated 21.04.2022 (annexure P-9) has been issued, which is impugned in the present petition; whereby, the learned Collector, who was not satisfied with the reply filed by the petitioner hold it guilty; and thereafter, directed for appearance of the petitioner today for submitting the explanation. It is pointed out in terms of Section-7 of the Madhya Pradesh Niji Vidyalaya (Fees Tatha Sambandhit Vishayon Ka Viniyaman) adhiniyam, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 2017 for the sake of brevity) there should be a formation of a District Committee for Regulating Fee duly headed by the District Collector and four other officers as mentioned in Section-7 of the act of 2017. The complaint is to be dealt with by the Committee; and thereafter, final result should be there. It is further observed that in sub Section (6) of Section-7 of the act of 2017 that the Committee shall give an opportunity of hearing to the management of the private school against whom inquiry has been instituted. No such procedure has been followed in the present case; on the contrary the Collector being dissatisfied with the response filed by the petitioner to the earlier show-cause notice has already held him guilty; and thereafter, directed for placing the matter before the Committee in terms of the act of 2017. It is submitted that as the rules are not followed; therefore, the aforesaid exercise taken up by the Collector is per se illegal and violative of Section-7 of the act of 2017. It is submitted that as the rules are not followed; therefore, the aforesaid exercise taken up by the Collector is per se illegal and violative of Section-7 of the act of 2017. Per contra, counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions and has submitted that this is not a final order, it is only a show-cause notice, which has been issued by the Collector and the petitioner was asked to appear on 26.04.2022 at 11:00 am to explain the circumstances regarding escalation of fees more than 10%, but the fact remains that in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the impugned show-cause notice the learned Collector has already showed his dissatisfaction with the reply submitted by the petitioner has held that there is an escalation of more than 10%, which is violative of the relevant provisions of the act of 2017. Formation of Committee by the Collector is also not reflected prior to passing such order. It is a Committee, who has to inquire into the matter and issue a show- cause notice in terms of Section-7 of the act of 2017. There is no justification in the order passed by the Collector, issuing a show-cause notice after recording a finding with respect to escalation of 10% fees by the petitioner. The counsel appearing for the State could not point out that there is a formation of the Committee prior to consideration of the case of the petitioner. In such circumstances, the impugned show-cause notice dated 21.04.2022 (annexure P-9) is per se illegal and is hereby quashed. However, the learned Collector is at liberty to form a Committee in terms of Section-7 of the act of 2017 and inquire into the complaint of the student regarding fees escalation and after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner pass a self contained speaking order on the complaint. Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and disposed of. Not orders as to cost. Certified copy as per rules.