'School Cannot Be Permitted To Be Shylock': Kerala High Court Issues Notice To School On Plea Against Denial Of Access To Online Classes Due To Non-Payment Of Fee

A plea filed before the Kerala High Court on Monday regarding a School debarring a student from attending online classes and charged an exorbitant late fee, remarked that the school cannot be permitted to be a Shylock. 

Justice Anu Sivaraman posted the matter to next week for further consideration. 

The petitioner's daughter was a student promoted to class VI, and was debarred from attending online classes due to non-payment of fee. Although the fee payable was shown as zero on the school's website, upon requesting fee details from the school's accounts department, he learned that the school has charged a late fee to the tune of 24,600/-. The petitioner accordingly filed an OP before the Permanent Lok Adalat to waive off the exorbitant late fee.

The CBSE School had purportedly sent a legal notice to a petitioner demanding 10 crores and blocked the online classes of the student. Allegedly, the school had debarred 150 such students from attending online classes citing non-payment of fees. 

While the school managed to settle the issues with other students, the petitioner was pressed to approach the Court since the School had apparently targeted him. Consequently, he sought that CBSE and State of Kerala Choice be directed against denial to access online classes to his daughter.

According to the petitioner, despite strict directions from the Supreme Court that a School Management shall not debar any student from attending classes for non-payment of fees, the respondent School allegedly denied her online classes on the ground that her school fee is pending and issued a legal notice to her parent.

Advocate Renjith B Marar appeared on behalf of the petitioner and argued that the petition raises substantial issues related to the interpretation of Articles 21, and 21 A of the Constitution of India in consonance with the provisions of the Right to Education Act.

It was also submitted before the Court that although the school claims to be a charitable organisation, the concerned authorities were keen on making profits rather than imparting education. 

"The petitioner is being witch-hunted and discriminated against by the school for having prayed for a little indulgence in arranging for the fee which had become due during the financial crisis imposed by the COVID pandemic. The respondent school cannot be permitted to be a Shylock. It is not a financial institution that needs to focus itself on profiteering. The school is trying to extract pounds of flesh from the petitioner which can never be permitted in law," the petition read.

Among the 150 students who were denied access, everyone except the petitioner was permitted to pay the fee in part and was subsequently given access to online classes. The petitioner was purportedly discriminated against and denied this facility as well, which is clear violation of Article 14.

The Single Bench issued notice to the respondent school by email and orally opined to clarify whether the petitioner's daughter was removed from the rolls of the school.

Earlier this year, the Department of General Education had started acting upon the complaints regarding certain unaided schools not permitting students to attend online classes citing non-payment of fees. 

Several parents had reportedly lodged complaints with the department upon the commencement of the new academic year in June, subsequent to which the department had directed district heads to look into these complaints expeditiously. 

Case Title: James Fletcher & Anr v. State of Kerala & Ors.