Authority: High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur

Order Date: 27.10.2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Raipur Institute Of Medical Sciences (authorized signatory Shri Krishna Kumar Vadhwa) and Shri Balaji Institute Of Medical Science (authorized signatory Shri Nitin Patel) together with Shri Balaji Medical Foundation; Respondents: State of Chhattisgarh, Director Medical Education, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (AFRC), Commissioner Medical Education.
  • Two writ petitions (W.P.(C) No. 253/2026 and W.P.(C) No. 284/2026) were consolidated as a common case (lead case W.P.(C) 253/2026).
  • The dispute centres on the AFRC’s recommendation dated 03.04.2025 which reduced the hostel‑mess charge from Rs 3,00,000 per student per year to Rs 78,059, and the transportation charge from Rs 2,50,000 to Rs 13,719.
  • The State Government issued an order on 18.09.2025 and the Commissioner Medical Education issued a further order on 23.09.2025, directing refund of the alleged excess amounts collected from students.
  • Petitioners alleged that the AFRC exceeded its jurisdiction under the Chhattisgarh Niji Vyavasayik Shikshan Sanstha (Pravesh Ka Viniyaman Avam Shulk Ka Nirdharan) Act, 2008, failed to consider material financial details, made assumptions about 100 % hostel occupancy, did not record any finding of profiteering, and violated Section 9(2) (principle of natural justice).
  • Petitioners submitted detailed cost sheets showing actual hostel occupancy: total student strength 664 (2022‑23), 867 (2023‑24), 889 (2024‑25); hostel occupants 506, 652, 732 respectively.
  • They also presented Chartered Accountant certificates indicating institutional losses, and argued that the Committee’s recommendation was signed by only four members whereas the statutory composition requires five.
  • The State counsel argued that the AFRC acted under Section 4(9) of the Act to adjudicate complaints of excessive collection, that sufficient notices and hearings were held on multiple dates (15.01.2024, 07.02.2024, 07.01.2025, 03.02.2025, 19.02.2025, 24.02.2025, 25.02.2025, 27.02.2025, 03.03.2025, 10.03.2025, 17.03.2025), and that the quorum of three members was satisfied.
  • The State also contended that the permissible expenditure was Rs 96,407 per student per annum, whereas the petitioners had collected Rs 5,50,000 per student per annum, resulting in an alleged excess collection of Rs 4,53,593 per student per annum.
  • Numerous Supreme Court judgments were cited (e.g., Najiya Neermunda (2021), P.A. Inamdar (2005), Icon Education Society (2023), Modern Dental College (2016)) emphasizing that fee fixation must avoid profiteering but must also consider actual expenditure and afford a genuine hearing.

Final Outcome

  • The Court quashed the AFRC’s recommendation dated 03.04.2025, the State’s order dated 18.09.2025, and the Commissioner’s order dated 23.09.2025 insofar as they relate to the petitioners.
  • All directions for refund of excess amounts were set aside.
  • The matter was remitted to the competent authority/AFRC for a fresh exercise in accordance with the 2008 Act and applicable regulations, with a mandatory completion period of three months from receipt of the order.
  • The fresh exercise must consider actual student strength, hostel occupancy, detailed expenditure on salaries, electricity, maintenance, fuel, infrastructure, hygiene, transportation, and must record reasons for accepting or rejecting material.
  • No costs were awarded to either party.

Topics: Fee Regulation, Private Medical Colleges, Natural Justice