Abu Tahir P.M. vs Union Of India Represented By Its ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6544 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

  WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.1826 OF 2021(C)


PETITIONER:

               ABU TAHIR P.M., AGED 34 YEARS
               S/O.MOIDU,REJILA MANZIL,NAMBIYAPURAM,
               PALLURUTHY,KOCHI-682006.

               BY ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIS

RESPONDENTS:

      1        UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS JOINT SECRETARY,
               MINISTRY OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY HUMAN
               RESOURCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 217-C,
               SHASTRI BHAVAN,NEW DELHI-110001.

      2        STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
               DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
               ROOM NO.302,3RD FLOOR,ANNEX-II,
               SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      3        THE CHAIRMAN,(ICSE),
               COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE
               EXAMINATIONS,PRAGATI HOUSE,3RD FLOOR,
               47-48 PLACE,NEW DELHI,PIN-110017

      4        PRINCIPAL, ST.ALOYSIUS ISC,CHIRAKAL,
               PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-682006.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.P.K.GEORGE
               SMT.SMITHA GEORGE
               GP-SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE
               SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR - ASGI

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD           ON
24.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 1826/21
                                          2



                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

stating that he is the father of Muhammed

Finan, who is a student studying in Standard V

in 'St.Aloysius ISC School', Chirakal,

Palluruthy - of which the 4th respondent is the

Principal; and alleging that, on account of

the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions, even

though the School had ceased to conduct

physical classes, they had not reduced the

fees in spite of several requests made. He

says that, therefore, all the parents

preferred Ext.P1 representation before the

School, to which they replied through Ext.P2,

saying that 25% fee has been reduced.

2. The petitioner says that though the

School informed the parents so, when the

actual fee was fixed, reduction was only about

17% to 18% and not 25%. He, therefore, prays

that the School be directed to grant a WPC 1826/21

discount of at least 25% for the fee for this

year, on account of the financial crisis

gripped all the parents severely.

3. In response to the afore submissions

made on behalf of the petitioner by his

learned counsel - Sri.Hanis M.H, the learned

counsel for the School - Smt.Smitha George,

submitted that a counter affidavit has been

filed on record, wherein, it has been

explained that the fee for the 2nd and 3rd terms

have been reduced by over 25% for all classes;

while a small reduction has been given in the

First Term fee also. She submitted that most

of the parents have paid the First Term fee

and that they have not raised any objection as

regards the percentage of reduction given for

the second and third terms fee.

4. Smt.Smitha George added that, since

the Covid-19 pandemic disruptions have now

virtually passed, the petitioner cannot seek WPC 1826/21

any further reduction, particularly when the

School has, on its own, granted nearly 20%

reduction across the board. She concluded her

submissions by saying that any further

reduction by the School is not possible, since

they are already charging very small fee and

that after the present reduction, the income

would not be sufficient to cover their expenses

for the academic year 2020-21.

5. In reply, Sri.Hanis M.H. submitted

that his client is now unemployed and engaged

in a small business, which is not sufficient

for him to meet the educational expenses of

his two children, including the child

mentioned in this Writ Petition. He,

therefore, prayed that the School be directed

to give some additional concession to his

client, so that he will be in a position to

pay off the fee for this year.

6. On hearing Sri.Hanis M.H. as afore, WPC 1826/21

Smt.Smitha George submitted that if the

petitioner only wants a discount for his

children, the School is willing to consider

the same and offered that it can be fixed at

30% as has been prayed for by him.

Taking note of the afore submissions and

since it will not be proper or prudent for

this Court to make a general order when the

petitioner alone has approached this Court, I

dispose of this Writ Petition, directing the

School to allow the petitioner to pay the

yearly fee in lump-sum on or before

30.03.2021, after granting a discount of 30%

of the entire fee, in comparison to the total

fee which had been fixed for the last academic

year.

Needless to say, this benefit is being

granted only to the petitioner, taking note of

the peculiar circumstances pleaded by him and

that if he does not make the payment within WPC 1826/21

the time frame granted herein, the same will

stand withdrawn.

Sd/-

                               DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
       RR                            JUDGE
 WPC 1826/21




                            APPENDIX
       PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

       EXHIBIT P1        TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION

DATED 11.09.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 HARD COPY OF THE MESSAGES SEND THROUGH WHATSAPP TO THE PARENTS OF THE STUDENTS