Tribune press service
Chandigarh, May 28
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that uploading a financial statement by private schools to their websites would provide transparency and help achieve the goal of preventing profits and the imposition of fees from capitation.
The rules of the bench
“Each institute is free to set its own pricing structure while taking into account facilities and infrastructure. Institutes are also allowed to generate surplus funds, which they can use for the improvement and growth of educational institutions. However, at the same time, institutions cannot be allowed to engage in profit or charge poll charges, ”the district court said.
The ruling came as a high court division bench dismissed a bunch of petitions filed by the Chandigarh Association of Independent Schools, the Kabir Education Society and other petitioners against the Union of India and other defendants.
Judicial Jaswant Singh and Judge Sant Parkash observed that the applicants were prejudiced by a certain provision of the Punjab Unaided Educational Institutions Fee Regulation Act 2016, extended to Chandigarh.
Their claim was that there was no justification for uploading the income and expenditure accounts and balance sheets to the website. It was not incidental to the objectives to be achieved by the main text. Schools were already submitting financial information to the relevant authorities. As such, uploading financial information to their websites was unnecessary as it would only make private institutions vulnerable to unbridled dissection of accounts by the public.
The bench claimed that the 2016 law extended to Chandigarh was enacted by the Punjab to provide for the constitution of a regulatory body to provide a mechanism to regulate the fees of unassisted educational institutions, in addition to related matters. and ancillary matters. Article 18 stipulated that each non-assisted educational institution had to keep proper accounts of costs and charges. He must also prepare an annual statement of accounts which had to be audited by a qualified accountant.
After hearing UT’s senior lawyer and permanent senior lawyer, Pankaj Jain, and the assertions of his rivals, the judiciary added that it was established that there could be no fixing of a structure. rigid tariff. “Each institute is free to set its own pricing structure while taking into account the facilities and infrastructure of the institute. In addition, institutes are also allowed to generate surplus funds which they can use for improvement and growth of educational institutions. But at the same time, institutions cannot be allowed to engage in profit or charge poll charges ”.