Stanes School Icse-Isc Parents Association (Sipa) v. The Principal Private Secretary Ncpcr
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.Nos.13910, 13911 and 13912 of 2025 Stanes School ICSE-ISC Parents Association (SIPA), Represented by its Secretary, Mr.Stephen Roy A, No.3D Kandhavel Foundry Compound, Kasthuribai Street, Ganapathy, Coimbatore 641 006.
Petitioner Vs
1. The Principal Private Secretary, NCPCR, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, 5th Floor, Chanderlok Building, 36 Janpath, New Delhi-110 001.
2.The Chief Executive and Secretary, Council for ICSE, Pragati House 3rd Floor, 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110 019.
3.The Principal Secretary, Tamil Nadu Government, School Education, St George Fort, Chennai 600 009.
4.The Special Officer, Tamil Nadu Private Schools Fees Determination Committee, Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kavil Vazhagam, Nungambakkam, Chennai.
5.The Director of Private Schools, School Education Department, Mgr Building, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600006.
6.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Parents Teachers Association , Director of School Education Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600006. 7.The District Collector Collectrate Campus, Coimbatore 641018.
8.The Chief Educational Officer No.500, Chief Educational Office, Raja Street, Near Five Corner, Coimbatore 641001.
9.The District Education Officer (Private School) Ondipudur, Coimbatore 641016.
10.The Correspondent Stanes School ICSE-ISC, Coimbatore 641018.
Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 4th respondent/Committee dated 13.01.2025 and quash the same as arbitrary in nature consequently directing the 4th respondent/Committee to determine the fees structure together with a direction to the 11th respondent/School to continue a Parent Teacher Association in accordance with Rule 41 of Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, For Petitioner : Mr.A.Parthasarathy For Respondents : M/s A.M.Ayyadurai, GA for R3 to R9
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent/Committee dated 13.01.2025 and to quash the same and consequently, direct the 4th respondent/Committee to determine the fees structure together with a direction to the 11th respondent/School to constitute a Parent Teacher Association in accordance with Rule 41 of the Tamil Nadu Private School (Regulation) Rules 2023.
2. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner/Parents of the children, who are admitted into the 10th respondent/ School is that the school goes on increasing the fees every year including 100% fee increase. Earlier, the details are compiled by the Fee Committee itself and it could be seen that the fee, which was Rs.65,000/- in the year 2019-2020 had become Rs.1,00,000/- in the year 2024-2025 and the fee, which was Rs.75,000/- in the year 2019-2020 had become Rs.1,55,000/- even more than 100%. When this was brought to the notice of the 4th respondent/Committee, the 4th respondent/Committee ought to have taken appropriate action against the 10th respondent/School. However, they had passed the impugned order and therefore, the petitioners are before this Court.
3. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the matter is still pending before the Honourable Supreme Court of India and an interim order is in force in favour of the 10th respondent/School and as such, within the powers the 4th respondent/Committee had passed the orders. In reply thereof, the learned counsel for the petitioner submit that not even a detailed inspection has been carried out.
4. I considered the rival submissions made and perused the materials records of the case.
5. The State of Tamil Nadu had passed the Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of Fee), Act, 2009 (in short "the Act") under which the private schools are not entitled to fix the fee by themselves. On the contrary, have to approach the fee Fixation Committee constituted under Section 5 of the said Act for fixing of the fees, by showing the necessary justification. As far as the CBSE and ICSE Schools are concerned, they had challenged the said Legislation and even though this Court has upheld the virus of the Act, now, the matter is pending before the Honourable Supreme Court of India in S.L.P.(Civil) No16 of 2013 and an interim order is granted in the said case that the School Committee will have only the limited power under Section 7(3) of the Act alone. On a perusal of Section 7(3) of the Act, it is clear that does not enable the
committee to fix the fee by itself. On the contrary, it can verify, whether the fee collected by the school is commensurate with the facilities. In that context, the Fee Committee had considered the petitioner's representation in detail and has found that the petitioner was not in a position to specifically point out lack of any particular infrastructure or that the collection of fees was not commensurate with the infrastructure. In this regard, though it is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioners being the Parents Association does not know about the exact details of the justification, the learned counsel would submit that a detailed inspection should be carried out.
Such a relief cannot be granted, even without any prima facie proof that the school in question is collecting the fees, which is not commensurate with the facilities. As rightly pointed out by the Fee Fixation Committee, it would be open for the petitionerparents association to point out the specific shortcomings or by pointing out particular facts before the Committee to verify and hold as to whether the fees hiked is commensurate with the facilities or not. It will also be open for the petitioner-parents association to approach the Honourable Supreme Court of India for any other interim relief, if they still choose to.
6. Therefore, on the face of it, it cannot be said that the order passed by the Fee Committee is erroneous. Neither the consequential relief, that is prayed for in the writ petition, directing the Fee Committee to fix the fee, can be granted, in view of the fact that the special leave petition is pending before the
Honourable Supreme Court of India and the interim order is in force as on today.
7. In view thereof, keeping open the liberty of the petitioner either to approach the Honourable Supreme Court of India by way of appropriate relief or to make a fresh representation before the Fee Fixation Committee bringing to their notice as to any specific lack of infrastructure etc. and any specific facts about the fees not being commensurate with the facilities provided, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.
05-01-2026 ari To 1.The Principal Private Secretary NCPCR National Commission For Protection Of Child Rights, 5th Floor, Chanderlok Building, 36 Janpath, New Delhi 110001.
2.The Chief Executive and Secretary Council For ICSE, Pragati House 3rd Floor 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019.
3.The Principal Secretary Tamil Nadu Government, School Education, St George, Fort, Chennai 600009.
4.The Special Officer, Tamil Nadu Private Schools Fees Determination Committee, Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kavil Vazhagam, Nungambakkam Chennai.
5.The Director Of Private Schools School Education Department, MGR Building, College Road, Nungambakkam Chennai 600006.
6.The Secretary Tamil Nadu State Parents Teachers Association, Director Of School Education Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600006.
7.The District Collector Collectrate Campus, Coimbatore 641018.
8.The Chief Educational Officer No.500 Chief Educational Office, Raja Street, Near Five Corner, Coimbatore 641001.
9.The District Education Officer (Private School) Ondipudur, Coimbatore 641016.
10.The Correspondent Stanes School ICSE-ISC, Coimbatore 641018.
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
ari and W.M.P.Nos.13910, 13911 and 13912 of 2025 05-01-2026
and W.M.P.Nos.13910, 13911 and 13912 of 2025 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.J., This matter is listed under the caption "for being mentioned".
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing for the tenth respondent submitted that his appearance had not been reflected in the appearance portion.
3. Accordingly, the appearance portion shall be corrected as follows: "For Petitioner : Mr.A.Parthasarathy For Respondents : Mr.A.M.Ayyadurai, GA for R3 to R9 Mr.M.Ramamoorthi for R10
4. The Registry is directed to issue a fresh order copy by carrying out the said correction in appearance portion.
02.02.2026 nsl
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.J., nsl and W.M.P.Nos.13910, 13911 and 13912 of 2025 02.02.2026