Vineet Ruia v. State of West Bengal

Name of The Case – Vineet Ruia v. State of West Bengal
Citation – W. P. No. 5479 (W) Of 2020
Year of Case – 2020
Appellant – Vineet Ruia
Respondent – Principal of Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Govt Of West Bengal
Bench – Sanjib Banerjee And Maushumi Bhattacharya

Vineet Ruia filed a PIL claiming that even though these institutions remained shut for four months they continued to demand regular fees and some even barred students from attending online classes over non-payment of dues. While hearing the Vineet Ruia case Calcutta High Court directed parents to remit 80% of fees demanded for August and September. In Vineet Ruia v. State of West Bengal case, while hearing pleas seeking the reduction of school fees charged by private schools in light of pandemic-induced financial constraints and reduced infrastructure maintenance expenses, the Calcutta High Court yesterday issued a series of directions. In July, Vineet Ruia filed a PIL representing nearly 15,000 parents from 112 private, unaided Kolkata schools affiliated to different boards. The PIL claimed that even though these institutions remained shut for four months they continued to demand regular fees and some even barred students from attending online classes over non-payment of dues. Ruia’s lawyer, Priyanka Agarwal, said they had sought discount on fees due to reduced cost in the running of the schools over the last four months.

Introduction

The petitioner represents the parents of over 15,000 students who are enrolled in more than 110 private, unaided schools in and around the city. All the schools have not been made parties. Three of the boards or councils to which the schools are affiliated have been impleaded; but none of such authorities is represented at today’s virtual hearing.

The principal grievance that is raised is that the private, unaided schools in the city and elsewhere in the State continue to demand regular fees though the schools have not functioned for the last four months. The writ petitioner demands appropriate discounts on account of reduced costs in the running of the schools over the last four months. The writ petitioner claims that online courses and examinations have been started by some of the 112 schools that are involved and students whose fees have not been cleared have been barred from participating in the online courses or taking online examinations only on such ground.

The State Government is represented. Learned Advocate-General submits that requests have been made from time to time by the State Government through notifications, calling upon the private, unaided schools to refrain from increasing the fees and for giving discounts and concessions to the students or parents. It is also the submission of the State that not all private, unaided schools have paid the salaries or dues of their employees, including the teachers. Some of the schools represented have been heard. It is submitted on behalf of such schools that contractual employees may not have been paid or their services renewed; but regular employees have been paid. However, no particulars in such regard have been furnished either in the petition, nor is it evident that the 112 schools that are involved in this case have either paid all their staff or have even paid them at a reduced level.

Background

The CHC vide its order of August 18, 2020 directed setting up a committee of two members to look into the financial statements of the schools involved in the proceedings so as to ascertain the expenses incurred by schools during lockdown.

The CHC  directed the schools involved in the proceedings to submit financial statements for the period January 2020 to July 2020 along with the figures for the January 2019 to July 2019, in the indicative tabular format along with the heads of disclosure, subject to such modifications in the heads as required by the schools, as appended to the order of the CHC.

The format has been bifurcated into an ‘income’ section, which includes monthly fees, periodic session fees, tiffin charges, sports charges, laboratory charges, bus charges and other fees, and an ‘expenditure’ section which includes salaries of teaching staff, salaries of non-teaching staff, licence fee or rent, electricity, corporation tax, maintenance charges, conservancy charges, printing & stationery, transportation charges, loan repayment, monthly or Periodic instalments and other expenses.

Additionally, statements are also required to be given by the schools with respect to:

i.  That no teaching or non-teaching staff have been terminated (whether contractual or permanent). If the services of any staff have been terminated, the particulars of such staff and the consequential financial implication.

ii. Pay-cuts, if any, and the consequential financial implication.

iii. The heads for which no expenditure has been incurred by the school during the lockdown.

iv. Additional expenses, if any, for online classes and online examinations (with break-up under various heads, if applicable).

The statements will need to be certified by the auditors of the school or chartered accountant who will be required to submit a declaration (in the format as appended to the order of the CHC) to this effect and an affidavit (in the format as appended to the order of the CHC) from the head of the school or such person conversant in the financial matters of the school is also required to be submitted.

Facts

The writ petition was apparently filed on July 7, 2020. Because of the increased Covid-19 cases in the city and several court employees being afflicted, judicial work at the High Court was suspended for the last ten days or so and extremely urgent matters have only been taken up on

the virtual mode from the residences of Hon’ble Judges assigned the relevant matters. In such circumstances, the writ petitioner filed WP(C) No.000722 before the Supreme Court seeking urgent interim orders till such time that this High Court was able to address the petition. In view of the petition now having been taken up by this court, the writ petitioner has submitted to unconditionally withdraw the petition filed before the Supreme Court. This order is made on the basis of such submission to withdraw the relevant petition from the Supreme Court.

The State Government is represented. Learned Advocate-General submits that requests have been made from time to time by the State Government through notifications, calling upon the private, unaided schools to refrain from increasing the fees and for giving discounts and concessions to the students or parents. It is also the submission of the State that not all private, unaided schools have paid the salaries or dues of their employees, including the teachers.

Issue

Establishment of a committee to ascertain the expenses incurred by schools during lockdown to determine if any concession in fees can be passed on to the students in view of the financial distress caused by the COVID 19 pandemic.

Mandate of the Committee: The committee is required to vet the figures submitted by the schools and look into applicable laws, regulations and guidelines of the affiliating board and ascertain whether the figures are in consonance applicable laws, regulations and guidelines of the affiliating board. As the committee is required to inquire into the veracity of the figures and the permissibility of the quantum of fees or the heads in accordance with the regulations and guidelines of the affiliating board, the committee can appoint a firm of chartered accounts to support in the financial assessment of the information submitted by the schools.

Judgement

A point of maintainability has been taken by some of the schools represented. Prima facie there may not be any merit in such point. However, the issue as to maintainability is left open to be addressed at a later stage.
It is not possible, particularly in the absence of the boards or councils to which the 112 schools are affiliated, to ascertain whether such authorities wield any power to regulate the fees of their affiliated schools. The writ petitioner will forward copies of this order to all the councils or boards to which these 112 schools are affiliated for such councils or boards to indicate their response before the matter is taken up next on the second Monday of August, 2020.

In addition, the writ petitioner will also forward copies of this order to each of the 112 schools which are involved. Such schools will have liberty to be represented at subsequent hearings. Such schools must attempt to file their affidavits, indicating, in particular, as to whether all the employees of the schools have been paid during the period of lockdown and the extent of discount that such schools are able to afford to the students for the schools not functioning during the relevant period. The State Government is also permitted to use an affidavit to disclose the several notifications that it has issued by way of advisories to the private, unaided schools. The stand of the State Government on the matters in issue should also be broadly indicated in such affidavit.

For the moment, none of the 112 schools involved should discontinue making online courses available to any of its students, unconditionally till August 15, 2020. Further, none of the 112 schools will prohibit any of the students from participating in the online examinations, if any, till August 15, 2020. These directions are applicable for all classes and all courses. By August 15, 2020, the outstanding dues of each student, as of July 31, 2020, have to be cleared to the extent of 80 per cent. Those already debarred from online courses or online examinations will be restored to their previous status. It is hoped that if substantial payments are made on behalf of the students who are in default, the relevant schools will not discontinue the online courses for any meagre shortfall in payment. A copy of the petition along with a copy of this order should also be forwarded in the office of learned Additional-Solicitor General in Calcutta.

After listening to entries made on 22 July, for the gain of aggrieved parents, the State and some of the faculties concerned, the Bench of Justices Sanjib Banerjee and Moushumi Bhattacharya gave the subsequent commands

After listening to entries made on 22 July, for the gain of aggrieved parents, the State and some of the faculties concerned, the Bench of Justices Sanjib Banerjee and Moushumi Bhattacharya gave the subsequent commands  None of the 112 schools will restrict any of the students from participating in the online examinations, if any, until August 15, 2020, For the moment, not one of the 112 schools worried must stop making online courses to be had to any of its students, unconditionally until August 15, 2020. By August 15, 2020, the terrific dues of every student, as of July 31, 2020, should be cleared to the quantity of 80%. Those already banned from online publications or online examinations could be restored to their preceding status. These guidelines practice for all lessons and all publications. The Court adjoins that “It is was hoping that if massive payments are made for the gain of the scholars who’re in default, the applicable schools will now no longer terminate the online courses for any meagre shortfall in payment. The Court changed into additionally informed that students whose costs have now no longer been cleared have been barred from collaborating with inside the online lessons or the online exams in this ground.



The Court moreover recorded the State’s submissions that now no longer each such school has paid the pay charges in their staff, which includes the instructors. Some of the schools that confirmed up beneath the watchful eye of the Court for the duration of the convention with their worker will not be paid, at the same time as their regular employee has been paid. The petitioner had advised suitable reductions to accept in rate payment, given the diminished costs of running the schools over the ongoing months. The State, through Advocate General Kishore Dutta, informed the Court that it had given more than one signal asking private, independent schools to stop from increasing charges. These warnings likewise recommended the schools to provide concessions in rate payment amid the lockdown, the Court changed into informed. The Bench guided the petitioner to serve copies of the order upon the schools and the faculty Boards so that they will seem earlier than the watchful eye of the Court and make submissions. The Court referred to that each one the involved schools have now no longer but been impleaded as parties, nor had the involved Boards to which those schools have been affiliated. The State has additionally been authorized to report an affidavit in the matter.

After listening to entries made on 22 July, for the gain of aggrieved parents, the State and some of the faculties concerned, the Bench of Justices Sanjib Banerjee and Moushumi Bhattacharya gave the subsequent commands

 None of the 112 schools will restrict any of the students from participating in the online examinations, if any, until August 15, 2020, For the moment, not one of the 112 schools worried must stop making online courses to be had to any of its students, unconditionally until August 15, 2020. By August 15, 2020, the terrific dues of every student, as of July 31, 2020, should be cleared to the quantity of 80%. Those already banned from online publications or online examinations could be restored to their preceding status. These guidelines practice for all lessons and all publications. The Court adjoins that “It is was hoping that if massive payments are made for the gain of the scholars who’re in default, the applicable schools will now no longer terminate the online courses for any meagre shortfall in payment. The Court changed into additionally informed that students whose costs have now no longer been cleared have been barred from collaborating with inside the online lessons or the online exams in this ground.

The Court moreover recorded the State’s submissions that now no longer each such school has paid the pay charges in their staff, which includes the instructors. Some of the schools that confirmed up beneath the watchful eye of the Court for the duration of the convention with their worker will not be paid, at the same time as their regular employee has been paid. The petitioner had advised suitable reductions to accept in rate payment, given the diminished costs of running the schools over the ongoing months. The State, through Advocate General Kishore Dutta, informed the Court that it had given more than one signal asking private, independent schools to stop from increasing charges. These warnings likewise recommended the schools to provide concessions in rate payment amid the lockdown, the Court changed into informed. The Bench guided the petitioner to serve copies of the order upon the schools and the faculty Boards so that they will seem earlier than the watchful eye of the Court and make submissions.

The Court referred to that each one the involved schools have now no longer but been impleaded as parties, nor had the involved Boards to which those schools have been affiliated. The State has additionally been authorized to report an affidavit in the matter. 

The Bench noted that some schools failed to furnish a month-wise breakup of the expenses incurred while others had questionable heads of income, to which the Committee had expressed reservations. The schools have been directed to file the account statements before the Court in sealed covers, to maintain confidentiality.

Analysis

The CHC’s order while constituting the committee, neither prescribes any contours or details related to the roles and responsibilities of the committee nor the extent of powers, roles and responsibilities of the chartered accountant in the course of investigating the books of accounts of the schools and preparing and submitting its report to the CHC.

Interestingly, there are no fee regulation laws or enactments in the state of West Bengal and the schools are free to fix fees commensurate with the facilities and services provided. Super imposition of such a committee in the absence of a fee regulation law during the pandemic with no right of representation to the schools before the committee is also being questioned. Only time will tell if the committee and the chartered accountants would assume certain investigation powers or not to the detriment of the schools but currently, the schools are anguished by this order as the committee has the power to assess the correctness of the expenses submitted and the revenue generated by the schools. Concerned with the continuing non-payment of fees by the parents but saddled with the obligation to pay teachers, staff and service providers and also provide on-line education, the order could not have come at a worse time for the schools in West Bengal.

References

www.shethepeople.tv › news Calcutta High Court Directs Parents to Remit 80% Of School Fees …

lawstreet.co › uploads › pdfsPDFwww.lawstreet.co

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://lawsisto.com/legalnewsread/NjkxNA%3D%3D/Calcutta-HC-directs-112-personal-unaided-schools-Students-must-receive-unconditional-get-right-of-entry-to-to-on-line-classes-till-Aug-15&ved=2ahUKEwiXjuuJqNzsAhVafisKHcsOCLMQFjAFegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2Y1PoeJZF7Y1ZWKo7n0y3U

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://calcuttahighcourt.gov.in/Notice-Files/CL/3085&ved=2ahUKEwiXjuuJqNzsAhVafisKHcsOCLMQFjAKegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw3BCHkH0eU3tIlmJL5qNixu

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *