[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Temple City Institute Of Technology vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 4 February, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.3303 of 2026
Temple City Institute of Technology .... Petitioner(s)
(TITE), Khordha
Represented by Adv.-
Mr. Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Party(s)
Represented by Adv.
Mr. Debraj Mohanty, AGA
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 04.02.2026
(Hybrid mode)
01. 1. Heard Mr. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate for
the State.
2. The petitioner-institution has invoked the writ jurisdiction
of this Court by filing the present writ petition to explore the
following relief:-
"a. Admit this writ petition, call for the records;
b. Issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or
any other further writ/directions to the Opposite Parties to
quash the notification dated 21 August 2025, issued by the
Opposite Party No.1 at Annexure-1 to the present Writ
Petition.
c. Issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or
any other further writ/directions to the Opposite Parties to
quash the letter dated 19 November 2025 issued by the
Opposite Party No.3 at Annexure-2 to the present Writ
Petition:
d. Issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or
any other further writ/directions to the Opposite Parties to
quash the recommendation dated 05 August 2025 of the
Opposite Party No.2, at Annexure-2 to the present Writ
Petition;
e. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to
decide the Course fees for the Petitioner institution by granting
an opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioner, and
strictly in accordance with Section 7(1) of the OPEI Act, and,
as per the law laid down by the Apex Court;
f. Issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or
any other further writ/directions to the Opposite Parties to take
no coercive actions against the Petitioner institute for
collecting the fees from the students concerned as per the
prevailing rate of the preceding years' fees notified by the State
Government, till the final disposal of the present Writ Petition.
g. Make the Rule absolute, if the Opposite Parties fail to show
cause or file insufficient cause in a time-bound manner; and
h. Pass any other order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the interest of justice, equity, and good conscience."
3. After extensively hearing learned counsel for both the
parties, the entire argument put forth by the learned counsel for the
petitioner is paused down to one issue i.e. non-adherence to the
principle of natural justice before passing the final order dated
19.11.2025 by the opposite party No.3 vide Annexure-2 fixing the
proposed fee structure for B.Tech and MBA course for the
Academic Session 2025-26 to 2027-28 at Rs.75,000/-. He has
pointed out to this Court that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
paragraph-5 of the order dated 03.12.2024 in S.L.P (c) No.21782
of 2023 has very categorically held as under:-
"5. It is a settled principle of law that any order inviting
adverse civil consequences cannot be passed without
adherence to the principles of natural justice. In any case, the
relevant provision itself requires a hearing to be given to the
institution(s) before a revision is made."
In the aforementioned case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
has examined the issue regarding the recommendation made by the
Fee Structure Committee for various institutions. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court found that before the recommendations were made
by the Fee Structuring Committee revising the Fee Structure, the
institutions were not given adequate opportunity of hearing.
4. It is ample clear from Sections 6 and 7 of the Orissa
Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission &
Fixation of Fee) Act, 2007 (for brevity the "Act of 2007") that the
Fee Structure Committee as well as the State Government would
determine the fee structure by following a set up procedure. One of
the requirement to be followed before determination of fee
structure is affording opportunity to the institution.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner by taking us to
Annexure-10, which is a letter dated 11.09.2025 has pointed out
that the letter has not indicated any date of hearing. He submitted
that the letter itself would lead to the only conclusion that before
the Fee Structuring Committee finally passed the order dated
19.11.2025 at Annexure-2, no audience was given to the petitioner-
institution by the Committee. The letter dated 11.09.2025 at
Annexure-10 reads as under for convenience of ready reference:-
Through E-mail
DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION &
TRAINING, ODISHA, CUTTACK.
Tel:0671-2301061 Email:[email protected]
Letter No. 12640/Date: 11-9-2025
DTET-TTI-FS-0004/2024
From
Shri Chakravarti Singh Rathore, IAS,
Director of Technical Education & Training,
Odisha & Member Secretary, FSC.
To
The Principal,
Temple City Institute of Technology & Engineering (TITE),
Taraboi, Jatni, Khordha-752050, [email protected]
Sub: Determination of fee structure from the Academic
Session 2025-26 to 2027-28-reg.
Ref: Your letter No. 259/2025 dated 13.08.2025.
Sir,
With reference to the Subject cited above, I am to say that
your representation for reconsideration of fee structure will be
placed before the Fee Structure Committee (FSC) in its next
meeting for necessary consideration. The
decision/recommendation of the Committee, as accepted by the
Government, will be communicated accordingly to you.
Yours faithfully,
Director of Technical Education
& Training, Odisha & Member Secretary, FSC."
Although the letter indicates that the representation for
reconsideration of fee structure by the petitioner-institution will be
placed before the Fee Structure Committee on the next meeting for
necessary consideration, but the date of meeting has not been
indicated in the said letter. Therefore, it appears that the institution
remained in dark before passing the final order dated 19.11.2025 at
Annexure-2.
6. Relying upon the other annexures enclosed with the writ
petition, learned counsel for the petitioner could successfully
demonstrate that no hearing whatsoever was afforded to the
institution before the final call in determining the fee structure was
taken by the opposite parties.
7. Learned counsel for the State could not dispose the same.
8. On hearing both the parties, we reach at irresistible
conclusion that principle of natural justice needs to be followed in
any circumstances not only as per the direction of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court but also as per the mandate of the Act of 2007.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, we feel it appropriate to direct the Fee Structuring Committee
to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-institution by
fixing a particular date. If they deserve merit, the Fee Structure
already determined may be varied.
9. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Manash Ranjan Pathak)
Judge
(Sibo Sankar Mishra)
Judge
Swarna
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 11-Feb-2026 16:58:22
