Supreme Court Stays Karnataka HC Judgment Which Struck Down Provisions Of Karnataka Education Act In Favour Of Unaided Private Schools

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a judgment of the Karnataka High Court which struck down certain provisions of the Karnataka Education Act 1983 in relation to the powers to regulate the fees and appointments of private unaided schools.

A three-judge bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and SV Bhatti passed the interim order while issuing notice on a special leave petition filed by the State of Karnataka challenging the High Court judgment delivered by a division bench in December 2022.

The High Court's ruling came on a batch of writ petitions filed by Karnataka Unaided Schools Management Association and various other private school managements who challenged the provisions as violating the fundamental rights under Article 14, 19(1)(g), 29(1) and 30 of the Constitution.

Challenging this verdict, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for the State argued before the Supreme Court that the High Court failed to consider various judgments passed by the Supreme Court in cases such as Modern Dental College and Indian School, Jodhpur. The senior counsel argued that the High Court's reliance on the observations in the TMA Pai judgment were misplaced and out of context.

The High Court bench comprising Justices Alok Aradhe and Vishwajith Shetty had found that the provisions would adversely affect the rights of unaided schools and struck them down the provisions in the light of the TMA Pai Foundation case that, “In the case of unaided private schools, maximum autonomy has to be with the management with regard to administration, including the right of appointment, disciplinary powers, admission of students and the fees to be charged.”

Unaided Educational institutions have a right to appoint staff in view of TMA Pai case- Karnataka High Court

Section 41(3) of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 stated that “while recruiting the teaching and non-teaching employees, every recognized educational institution shall comply with the orders issued by the State Government from time to time for reservation of posts to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes of citizens and the weaker sections of people.”

The Karnataka High Court held that “the unaided educational institution have a right to appoint staff - teaching and non-teaching in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court in TMA Pai Foundation case. Section 41(3) of the 1983 Act curtails the aforesaid right. Thus, applying the principle of severability, the Court held that Section 41(3) of the 1983 Act does apply to private unaided schools.

Private unaided educational institutions are entitled to fix reasonable fee structure

Rule 4(4) of the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Regulation of Certain Fees and Donations) Rules stated that in addition to the tuition fee, a private unaided educational institution may charge a term fee not exceeding ten percent of the tuition fee.

Rule 10(3)(c)(ii) of the 1995 Rules stated that in the case of a recognized unaided educational institution up to a maximum of Rs.600/- per year.

The High Court held that “in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Society for unaided private schools in Rajasthan- private unaided educational institutions are entitled to fix their fee structure which may be reasonable. Rule 4(4) of the 1999 Rules and Rule 10(3)(c)(ii) of the 1995 Rules is struck down as the same is violative of the law declared by the Supreme Court".

The State's SLP was filed through Advocate-on-Record VN Raghupathy.

Case title: The State of Karnataka v. Karnataka Unaided Schools Management Association

Citation: SLP(C) No. 12037-12042/2023