Chattisgarh High Court
Holy Cross Sr. Sec. School vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 June, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:23122
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1999 of 2022
1 - Carmel School Through- Its Principal, Namankala, Ambikapur,
Sarguja Distt. (C.G.)
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, School Education
Department Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
Raipur Dist. CG
2 - Collector Dist. Collectorate, Ambikapur, Surguja, Dist. CG
3 - Dist. Education Officer Ambikapur, Sarguja Dist. CG
--- Respondent(s)
WPC No. 2034 of 2022
1 – Montfort School Ambikapur Through- Its Principal, Sargawan Post,
Sakalo, Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh
—Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 – The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, School Education
Department, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2
2 – Collector Dist. Collectorate, Ambikapur, District : Surguja
(Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh
3 – Dist. Education Officer Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur),
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent(s)
WPC No. 2017 of 2022
1 – Holy Cross Sr. Sec. School Through Its Principal, P.O. Ambikapur,
Sarguja District C.G. State
—Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 – The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education
Department, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
Raipur District C.G. State.
2 – Collector, District Collectorate, Ambikapur, Sarguja District CG.
3 – District Education Officer, Ambikapur, Sarguja District CG.
--- Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Shri K.R.Nair, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, PL
(Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)
Order on Board
11/06/2025
The above Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari filed
Mandamus and quash the impugned order dated 18.04.2022 and has
prayed for the following reliefs:
3
“10.1. it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court be
pleased to call for the entire records of the case
from the possession and custody of the respondent
for its examination.
10.2. it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased
to quash/set aside the impugned order dated
18.04.2022 (Annexure P/1).
10.3. it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased
to direct the respondents to refrain themselves from
taking any action against the petitioner which is
arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
10.4. it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased
to grant any other relief as may be fit and proper as
considered by this Court in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Factual matrix of the case are that the petitioners are English
Medium Higher Secondary Schools, established and managed by the
Christian Minority at Ambikapur and run by a society registered under
the Society Registration Act, 1973, affiliated to Central Board of
Secondary Education, New Delhi. The affiliation is valid upto
31.03.2023. The schools of the petitioners are unaided minority
educational institutions and they does not receive any funds from the
State of Central Government or its agencies and a self financing
school. They manage the affairs from the funds raised by the schools
themselves and has been declared as Minority Educational Institutions
under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India by the National
Commission of Minority Educational Institutions, New Delhi by order
No. 59 of 2007 dated 26.04.2007. Section 2 of the CG Non-
4
Government Schools Fees Regulation Act, 2020 expressly states that it
will not apply to the schools established by the minorities under Article
29 and 30 fo the Constitution of India. Section (2) 1 of the Act, 2020
reads as under:
” 1. Non-Government School means such a school,
the fees of which is not fixed by Government of CG
or Government of India or any organization of
Government of CG or Government of India.
” Provided that it will not include schools
established by minorities under Article 29 and 30 of
the Constitution of India.”
3. The Non-Government School Fees Act, 2020 was passed and
came into force on 28.09.2020 and is applicable through out the State.
The provisions of Right to Free Education Act, 2009 are not applicable
to the petitioners, being unaided minority educational institutions as
held by the Supreme Court in the case of Pramati Educational and
Cultural Trust and Others Vs. Union of India reported in 2014(8)
SCC 1. Therefore the DEO has no power either under the CG Fees
Regulations Act of 2020 or under the RTE Act of 2009 to issue
directions.
4. According to the petitioners/schools, these are some of the
prominent institutions in the Ambikapur district having all sorts of
modern infrastructure facilities and atmosphere required for a good
educational institution. The contention of the petitioner is that for proper
maintenance of the schools and the infrastructure available in the
schools and also for timely payment of salary of the teaching and non-
teaching staff and other employees engaged in these private
institutions are to be paid and therefore the schools may be permitted
to collect the fees from the student who are undertaking education in
5
their respective schools. The substantial portion of the expense
incurred by the educational institutions is recovered from the school
fee/tuition fees collected from the students.
5. The District Education Officer knowing well about the all round
increase in the expenditure, issued the order dated 18.04.2022 that the
excess fees collected may be refunded to the students. The
petitioners/schools on enquiry has come to know that these
instructions have been issued only to the Christian minority educations
institutions in Ambikapur and not to other non-government schools in
Ambikapur. Similarly, the DEOs’ in other districts have not issued any
such directions to any schools. The directions issued by the DEO and
the impugned order in the present petitions are contrary to the
provisions contained in Section 2 of the CG Non Government Schools
Fees Regulation Act, 2020. Hence these petitions filed by the
petitioners/schools.
6. Contention on the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the
actions of the respondents in the issuance of the impugned order is
without any authority of law and without any basis or justification. He
submits that the minority educational institutions are exempted fro
application of the provisions of the Non-government School Fee
Regulation At, 2020 as also the RTE Act 2009 and the DEO has no
power or authority or jurisdiction to exercise any control over the
decision of the School Managing Committee in the matter of charging
and collecting fees from the students. He submits that the DEO is
usurping power, and taking action against the petitioners/schools is
ultra vires the provision of the Act of 2020 and the Act of 2009 and
therefore is not tenable and is liable to be set aside. He submits that
6
the order impugned in the present petitions has been issued in contrary
to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pramati
Educational and Cultural Trust Vs.UOI (supra) and therefore it is
liable to set aside.
7. Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions of the
counsel for the petitioners and submit that it is no doubt, true that the
private unaided educational institutions, that these schools are required
to incur huge expenditure towards payment of salaries to their teachers
and staff, establishment charges, rent for buildings, vehicle
maintenance, ESI, EPF to its employees, etc., which is unprecedented.
The object of the Order dated 18.04.2022 is to ease the burden on
parents, in being required to pay the huge fees which these private
institutions charge.
8. Heard the rival contentions of the learned counsels for the
parties and perused the records. The impugned order dated
18.04.2022 issued by the respondent No.3/DEO, Ambikapur is not
sustainable and deserves to be set aside for the reason that the DEO
has issued a blanket order stating that heavy fine or penalty would be
imposed on these schools if there is violation of the High Court order
dated 09.07.2020 passed in WPC No. 1040 of 2020. It is pertinent to
mention here that in the above writ petition, this Court has observed
that since the order impugned issued by the respondent No. 2
(Annexure P/1) was during the Covid-19 lock down period and it would
not apply to the present petitioners as per the provisions of Section 2
of the CG Non-Government Schools Fees Regulation Act, 2020. As the
petitioners are minority educational institutions within the meaning of
7
Section 2(g) of the National Commission For Minority Educational
Institutions Act, 2004, the petitioners are exempted from the Act of
2020 and therefore the respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction to pass
order (Annexure P/1). The contention of the petitioners is that they
have to incur expenditure without collecting fees from its students, is
understandable, in times of crisis but the Order of the DEO binds these
private schools and, as long as it continues to remain in force, they are
bound to adhere to the conditions stipulated therein. This contention of
the State counsel is not accepted and thus taking into consideration
the fact that these are unaided minority educational institutions and
depend substantially on the tuition fees that is collected for sustaining
teaching, non teaching and other employees engaged in the schools
which are totally unaided and further that they have to incur
expenditure in the maintenance of the school infrastructure and
payment towards electricity charges and security agencies and in the
opinion of this court it seems justified that to undertake all such
requirements and ensuring the safety measures, these schools have to
make endeavour to maintain their institutions.
9. With the aforesaid observation, the petitions are allowed and the
order impugned dated 18.04.2022 (Annexure P/1) is set
aside/quashed.
Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
Digitally signed
by SUGUNA
DUBEY
SUGUNA Date:
DUBEY 2025.06.24
17:27:47
+0530