“Transfer Certificates Not A Tool For Schools To Collect Arrears Of Fees From Parents”: Madras High Court

Noting that TC was not a tool for schools to collect arrears of fee from the parents, the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan observed that when an entry regarding arrears of fee is made in the TC, it would stigmatize the child and was a form of mental harassment under Section 17 of the Right to Education Act.

“A TC is not a tool for the schools to collect arrear fees from the parents or to weigh the financial capacity of the parents. TC is a personal document issued in the name of the child. Schools cannot put their own problems on the child by making unnecessary entries on the TC…. What will the child do if the parents failed to pay the fees? It is not their fault and to stigmatise and harass the child is a form of mental harassment under Section17 of the RTE Act,” the court observed.

The court added that harassing children over non-payment or delayed payment of fees amounts to cruelty under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015. While the court acknowledged that schools could initiate action under the law for recovery of fees, the court stressed that in the process, a child should not be punished or harassed over the default of payment of the fee.

The court was hearing an appeal preferred by the State against the order of a single judge wherein it was observed that mere indication of arrears of fee payable by the students did not have any negative connotation or impact against the students or their parents. The State preferred the appeal on the ground that the single judge's observation was against the provisions of the RTE Act.

The court agreed with the State and observed that the right to education for children was the core of the legislature and all other arguments would take a back seat. The court added that a transfer certificate was only a tool to ensure that a child was studying in one particular school at a time and should not be used by the schools to weigh the financial capacity of the parents.

Noting that the TN Rules obligated the need for TC at the time of admission into schools, the court recommended that suitable amendments may be made to the Tamil Nadu Education Rules and Code of Regulation for Matriculation Schools In Tamil Nadu to amend the provision. The court added that any provision in the state rules that ran contrary to the RTE Act would be treated as null and void.

The court noted that the proviso to Section 5(2) of the RTE Act stated that delay in obtaining a TC should not be a ground to deny admission. The court also noted that the provisions of the RTE Act made it clear that a child's education would take precedence over any other factor. Thus, the court observed that when the RTE Act itself had watered down the importance of the TC, the state legislature could not mandate the same as the same goes against the welfare of the children.

“Hence from the aforesaid interpretations, it is pristinely clear that a TC in itself is not mandatory for getting admitted in a school. When the mandatory nature of the TC itself is diluted, any further clauses to be included in the TC, more specifically the impugned Serial Number (8) in Annexure-5 of the Code of Regulations for Matriculation Schools has to be removed. This is an irrelevant clause to be added to a TC and furthermore it goes against the welfare of the children and acts against their best interest,” the court observed.

The court also emphasized that the schools should not involve the children in the fee collection process as it would cause them stress and results in low self-esteem. The court added that financial strains of the family often affected children and it was the duty of the schools to understand the emotional challenges faced by the child during such time instead of burdening them.

“It is the duty of the school to understand the emotional challenges faced by the child during such times and instead of burdening them, it is a time to lend their care and assistance to the child. It is a traumatic experience for the child when it receives a TC with stigmatising remarks on non-payment or delayed payment of fees. Such action by the school authorities attracts section 17 of the RTE Act,” the court said.

The court thus stressed that a holistic approach needed to be adopted to reduce the stigma, labeling, and discrimination of the child. The court added that while change begins at home, it is carried forward to a community only with the aid of institutions like schools.

Counsel for Appellants: Mr.U.M.Ravi Chandran, Special Government Pleader (Education)

Counsel for Respondent: Mr.G.Sankaran, Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 285

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu and Others v All India Private Schools Legal Protection Society

Case No: W.A.No.3075 of 2021