JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, C.J.
1. CM 10479/99 has been filed in CW 3723/97 wherein the following reliefs have been prayed for:
“In the premises aforesaid the petitioner most humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to :-
(a) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to take necessary steps forthwith to regulate admissions in the recognized unaided private schools in Delhi in order to avoid and to check demands of illegal money in the name of the donation by the schools at the time of admission ;
(b) issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents-government to frame a policy or to make necessary amendments in the law regulating recognition and conditions thereof including admission and payment of fee etc. of the recognized unaided private schools at pre-primary stage ;
(c) issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents-government to constitute forthwith Delhi School Education Advisory Board as required under Section 22 of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and the Rules made there under and in this regard the interest of the parents by giving them a sufficient representation in the said advisory board be safeguarded ;
(d) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents-government to take measures by way of policy decision or amendments in the law or otherwise to take and regulate the arbitrary increase in fee in every year by recognized unaided private schools in Delhi;
(e) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the recognized unaided private schools in Delhi to stop increasing fee and other charges every year except in accordance with the law and the excess fee and other charges, which have already been charged from the students should be refunded to the students Along with 18% interest per annum there upon;
(f) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents-government to take necessary steps or actions against the erring recognized unaided private schools who have failed to organize parent-teacher association democratically which they are required to do so in terms of the provisions of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and the Rules made there under;
(g) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the schools to refund re-admission fee which has been charged while promoting students to Class-XI Along with 18% interest per annum to the students from whom the same is charges ;
(h) issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the government to consider sharing of financial burden of the parents to the extent of expenditure being borne by the government in a case of child studying in a government school or in other words, the government should give aid to recognized unaided private schools on compulsory basis.
(i) Pass any such further order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may in the facts and Circumstances of the present case deem fit and proper in favor of the petitioners and against the respondents ; and (j) Allow the present petition with costs.
2. The afore-mentioned writ petition was filed, Inter alia, questioning the right of various aided and unaided schools to fix tution and other fees from students. By a judgment and order dated 30th October 1998 since reported in AIR 1999 Delhi 124, a Division Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition with several directions, viz.
“51. For the examination of the rival contentions a close examination of the facts figures and accounts of each schools was necessary. Neither this Court is fully equipped nor it is possible for this Court on the facts of the present case, to even otherwise undertake this exercise in respect of each individual school. Such an exercise has to be undertake by authorities or by an independent Committee, which this Court may appoint. With the large number of private unaided recognized schools in Delhi such an exercise by itself may be a time consuming process. If a particular school, on examination of facts and figures is found to be indulging in the malpractice of increasing the fees and charges in the garb of the implementation of the 5th Pay Commission or otherwise is found to be indulging in commercialization the Government is not without power to take appropriate action under the Act and the Rules against such erring school. Presently, the question has also been raised as to the validity of exercise of power by issue of impugned general order directing all schools not to charge higher fee and charges in terms thereof and not restricting to schools, which were inspected.
3. It was further directed in para 65 :
65. In view of the aforesaid discussion our conclusions may be summarized as under:
(v) The tuition fee cannot be fixed to recover capital expenditure to be incurred on the properties of the society. (x) An independent statutory committee, by amendment of law, if necessary deserves to be constituted to go into factual matters and adjudicate disputes which may arise in future in the matter of fixation of tuition fee and other charges.
4. While making the afore-mentioned observations, the Division Bench also directed appointment of a Committee comprising of Ms. Justice Santosh Duggal, a retired Judge of the Court as Chairperson with power to nominate two persons one with the knowledge of accounts and the second from field of education in consultation with Chief Secretary of NCT of Delhi to decide matters to fee and other charges leviable by individual schools to terms of the said decisions.
5. The Committee was notified by a Notification issued on 7th December 1998, the terms of reference whereof are :
“TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE”
(a) To decide the claims regarding hike in fee by the individual schools for the period covered by the order number DE. 15/Act/Spl. lnsp/150/97/1293-2093 dated the 10th September 1997 issued by the Director of Education, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and up to the start of the academic session in the year 1999 and other charges leviable by individual schools in terms of decision of High Court in C.W.P. No, 3723/1997 as expeditiously as possible after getting an opportunity to the schools. Representative of the Parent-Teachers’ Association and such other person as the Chairperson may deem fit with a view to prevent commercialization and exploitation in private un-aided schools including schools run by minorities.
(b) To decide any other charges levied/liable by individual school which has not been covered in order number DE. 15/Act/Spl. lnsp/150/97/1293-2093 dated 10th September 1997 issued by the Director of Education, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi dated the 30th Oct., 1998 in the case of Delhi Abhibhavak Mahasangh v. Union of India and Other, (Civil Writ Petition No. 3723 of 7997).
6. The said Committee, has submitted its report. The said report has been accepted by the Administration. It appears that the petitioners did not appear before the said Committee despite notice. However, by reason of the present application, the following prayers have been made :
(a) direct revival of Mrs. Santhosh Duggal Committee and with the directions to the committee for completing their task as assigned to them in terms of the judgment dated 30th October, 1998 ; (b) direct the Government of Delhi and Director of Education to obtain/collect all the requisite particulars and information as desired by the committee from all the schools concerned, place the same before the committee and get cases of all the schools adjudicated; (c) direct all the unaided recognized private schools in Delhi to submit/produce all the requisite particulars/information as desired , or may be desired or any desired by the committee and also to extend all co-operation to the committee to complete its task as assigned to it by this Hon'ble Court; (d) pass any such further order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may in the facts and circumstances of the present case deem fit and proper in favor of the petitioner and against the respondents. 7. The said prayers have been made, Inter alia, on the premise that the Committee did not perform its job which was entrusted to it by this Court.
8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that having regard to the terms of reference, it was the bounden duty of the said Committee to consider the fee structure in each and every school so as to enable the guardians of the students to get refund of the excess fees which had been collected by the schools.
9. The writ petition, as noticed earlier, has been disposed of. The judgment of the Division Bench of this Court is pending decision before the Supreme Court of India as a Special Leave Petition filed there against. Leave to appeal has been granted therein, it is accepted at the bar that the report of the said Committee has been placed on record before the Supreme Court of India. It is also accepted that pursuant to the recommendations of Santosh Duggal Committee, the Delhi Administration has already constituted a Committee which has to consider the individual complaints against the defaulting schools.
10. It further appears that contempt petitions filed against some schools had also been dismissed.
11. Keeping in view the fact that the matter is pending before the Apex Court and in any event, grievances against the individual schools can be raised by the guardians of the wards before the Committee constituted by the Delhi Administration, we are of the opinion that it is not necessary to entertain the petition or pass any directions on the said petition. It is dismissed accordingly. No orders as to costs.