New Delhi: Seeking an immediate stay on the fee rule introduced by Delhi govt, private unaided schools in the national capital have approached the Supreme Court, challenging the implementation of the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 2025.In its plea, the Action Committee of Unaided, Recognised, Private Schools (ACURPS) seeks urgent intervention of the apex court, arguing that the formation of any school committee as mandated under the 2025 law, “comprised majorly of parents and teachers, would lead to a perennial and irreconcilable difference and confrontation between the school managements and the said interested parties and would leave the managements at the whims, fancies and mercy of the said body”.
The schools have argued Delhi High Court “brushed aside” their key objections against the fee rule, “refusing to take cognisance and grant stay of the wholly irreconcilable, repugnant act and rules framed by Delhi Assembly, which are directly contrary to the already existing central legislation being the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 (DSEAR)”. Earlier this month, HC refused to stay the govt notification, only extending the deadlines fixed to form the school-level committees.The plea says the central law grants primacy to the fee as fixed by the School Management Committee, which comprises 21 members with two parents and one teacher, apart from four nominees of DoE, and which has to function as per majority (democratically) but Delhi fee law “seeks to undermine and render meaningless the fee fixed by the SMC under the central act and makes the fee subject to an approval of a committee comprising five parents, three teachers, one principal and one member of the management, which has to decide the matter unanimously as opposed to democratically.“The petition further argues that there is no requirement of prior approval before fixing or enhancing the fee at the start of the academic year, and also that the fee fixed by the SMC cannot be made subject to an approval of the parent teacher association, as there is no such provision under the act.“Completely contrary to the same, the state legislation seeks to insist on not only a prior approval before increasing the fees, but also seeks to vest that power to grant approval in a body comprising majorly of the parents and teachers. The impugned legislations, in mandating a prior approval to the fee of schools, in vesting the powers with veto and decisive powers of quantum of fee and divesting the management from being the decision maker of fee to be charged, is diametrically opposite and repugnant to the provisions of DSEAR,” the plea says, citing earlier rulings of SC and Delhi HC.SC is likely to examine the appeal this week or the next.
