The Committee has been constituted in consonance with the judicial direction in a long drawn battle with an aim and object to protect the interest of the students community as a whole as also the minorities themselves in maintaining required standards of professional education on non-exploitative terms in the Institutions.

There was a dispute relating to opening of educational institutions and control of management, etc.

          Taking all aspects, a Bench of the Supreme Court constituting 11 Judges in a case ofT.M.A. Pai foundation v. State of Karnataka reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481 held that a State Regulation should be minimal and only with a view to maintain fairness and transparency in Admission Procedure and as to check exploitation of the students by charging exorbitant money or capitation fee.

Subsequently in the case of Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697, the Apex Court taking into consideration the earlier decision issued guidelines in the matter of regulating the fee payable by the students to the educational institutions, which reads as such:-

          “We direct that in order to give effect to the judgment in T.M.A. Pai case the respective State Governments/authority concerned shall set up, in each State, a committee headed by a retired High Court Judge who shall be nominated by the Judge, should be a Chartered Accountant of repute. A representative of the Medical Council of India (in short ‘MCT’) or the All India Council for Technical Education (in short ‘AICTE’), depending on the type of institution, shall also be a member. The Secretary of the State Government in charge of Medical Education or Technical Education, as the case may be, shall be a member and Secretary of the Committee. The Committee should be free to nominate/co-opt another independent person of retpute, so that the total number of members of the Committee shall not exceed five. Each educational institute must place before this Committee, well in advance of the academic year, its proposed fee structure. Along with the proposed fee structure all relevant documents and books of accounts must also be produced before the Committee for their scrutiny. The Committee shall then decide whether the fees proposed by that institute are justified and are profiteering or charging capitation fee. The Committee will be at liberty to approve the fee structure or to propose some other fee which can be charged by the institute. The fee fixed by the Committee shall be binding for a period of three years, at the end of which period the institute would be at liberty to apply for revision. Once fees are fixed by the Committee, the institute cannot charge either directly or indirectly any other amount over and above the amount fixed as fees. If any other amount is charged, under any other head or guise e.g. donations, the same would amount to charging of capitation fee. The Governments/appropriate authorities should consider framing appropriate regulations, if not already framed, whereunder if it is found that an institution is charging capitation fees or profiteering that institution can be appropriate penalised and also face the prospect of losing its recognition/affiliation.”

         The above direction again became subject matter of judicial scrutiny and in a case P.A. Inamdar and others v. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2005) SCC 537, wherein a direction relating to formation of the Committee got approval.

         In view of the above in the State of Bihar, earlier the Committee on the subject was formed wherein Mr. Justice P.N. yadav was nominated as Chairman. But unfortunately after a short period Mr. Justice Yadav was given the responsibility of the State Consumers Forum as Chairman. Thereafter for a long period, no Committee was functional. However, in the year 2016 on the recommendation of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, Patna High Court, Patna, His Excellency, the Governor of Bihar nominated Mr. Justice Akhilesh Chandra as Chairman of the Committee vide order dated 15.09.2016 but on one ground or the other, the Health Department, Government of Bihar could be able to issue its notification bearing No.448 (1) dated 13.04.2017. Thereafter, the nominated Chairman joined on 17.04.2017. After nomination of Chartered Accountant, Representative of Medical Council of India and thereafter joining of the 5th independent Member, the Committee can be said to be fully constituted on 16.09.2017.

         The Committee is to work as a regulatory measure and to act rationally and reasonably with due regard for realities, simultaneously is to refrain from generalising fee structure and, where needed, should go into accounts, schemes, plans and budgets of an individual institution for the purpose of finding out what would be an ideal and reasonable fee structure for the institution.

         As regard to the Medical and Dental Colleges as also other technical institutions, nothing has been done till date in spite of best possible efforts.

         Before concluding, it is equally relevant to mention About Us that it is a quasi-judicial institution and in the event of any individual educational institution, it is found that the Committee has exceeded its power by unduly interfering in the administrative and financial matters of the unaided private professional institutions, the decision of the Committee being quasi- judicial in nature would always be subject to judicial review.