
Delhi HC allows DPS Dwarka students back in class, Orders 50% payment of hiked fees
Delhi High Court
has allowed students of Delhi Public School (DPS), Dwarka—whose names were struck off the rolls for non-payment of hiked fees—to continue attending classes, subject to partial fee payment.
Justice Vikas Mahajan, while hearing a petition filed by over 100 parents, directed that the students be readmitted on the condition that 50% of the increased fee for academic years 2024–25 onwards is deposited.
Background: Fee hike and expulsion row
The dispute traces back to May 9, when parents received email notifications informing them that their children's names had been removed from the rolls due to alleged non-payment of school fees. The action, according to the plea, followed the school's decision to raise monthly fees, first to ₹7,000 and then to ₹9,000.
Parents alleged coercive measures had been used in recent years to collect unapproved fees—including deploying bouncers at school gates.
The plea submitted to the court accused the school of violating land allotment conditions and claimed repeated non-compliance with directions issued by the Directorate of Education (DoE). The parents further questioned the legitimacy of the Delhi government's audit into the school's finances, calling it insufficient and lacking transparency.
They demanded both a forensic audit and an audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, insisting the findings be made public before any fee hike is accepted.
Court's observations and interim arrangement
Justice Mahajan noted that while private unaided schools are permitted to determine fees based on projected expenses without prior DoE approval, such fee statements are ultimately subject to DoE's review. If found irrational or amounting to profiteering or commercialisation, DoE is empowered to reject the enhancement and order a rollback.
The court recorded that the DoE had already rejected the fee hike for the academic year 2023–24, and though the school challenged this order, no stay was granted. The interim relief sought by parents pertained to the subsequent academic years, including 2024–25 and the current year, 2025–26.
In its order, the court held that in the absence of a DoE decision rejecting the fee hike for these years, the parents are required to pay as per the school's submitted fee statements.
Accordingly, it directed that the students be allowed to continue in their respective classes on the condition that 50% of the hiked fee component is paid, while the base fee must be deposited in full. The court added that this arrangement will remain in force until the final disposal of the writ petition.
Pending matters and future proceedings
An urgent application was also filed by the petitioners, seeking instructions to ensure the school charges only DoE-approved fees for academic session 2025–26 and onwards.
The court issued notice on the main writ petition and scheduled the next hearing for August 28.
In a related development, a coordinate bench has reserved its judgment on a separate petition involving 32 students who were also expelled over non-payment of fees.
Policy context
This legal battle coincides with the Delhi government's proposal of a new law aimed at curbing arbitrary fee hikes in private schools. The draft legislation includes setting up fee regulation committees at the school, district, and state levels, with penalties for coercive actions like denying students entry to classrooms.
As the matter progresses in court, the outcome may have broader implications for fee regulation in Delhi's private education sector.
Ready to empower your child for the AI era? Join our program now! Hurry, only a few seats left.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
8 hours ago
- The Hindu
CM SHRI Schools admission window extended till August 22
The application window to CM SHRI Schools has been extended from August 15 to August 22, and the 'CM Shri Schools Admission Test 2025', which was to be conducted on August 30, will now be conducted on September 6, the Directorate of Education (DoE) said in a notification. On July 30, the DoE had opened the application window to 33 CM SHRI Schools. The notification, dated August 13, stated that the extension of the last date to submit online application forms and the subsequent examination has been extended 'in view of the overwhelming response and numerous requests from eligible applicants and other stakeholders seeking an extension'. Aam Aadmi Party's Dr. BR Ambedkar Schools of Specialised Excellence (ASoSE) are being upgraded and expanded to be in line with the PM SHRI Schools. In addition to the existing ASoSEs, other schools are also being converted to PM SHRI Schools under this expansion project and will comprise modern infrastructure and teaching-learning methods. A total of 75 CM SHRI schools will be established in the Capital. Earlier, Education Minister Ashish Sood said that the Delhi Board of School Education will be phased out gradually and replaced by CBSE.


NDTV
8 hours ago
- NDTV
Consenting Adults Have Right To Choose Partners, Live Together: Delhi High Court
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has called the right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and live together "a facet of their personal liberty and privacy" being immune to the family's disapproval. "The Supreme court has repeatedly affirmed this position and directed the police to safeguard such couples from intimidation or harm," Justice Sanjeev Narula said on August 5. The court, as a result, directed the police to provide protection to a young couple, who married against the wishes of their families and were now being threatened. "The right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and to live together in peace is a facet of their personal liberty, privacy, and dignity protected under Article 21. Family disapproval cannot curtail that autonomy," the order highlighted. The couple sought the court's intervention to ensure their safety in living together, claiming threats, coercion and interference being extended by the family members. The court was urged to direct the woman's family not to harm them or interfere in their peaceful cohabitation. The plea said the woman's family was against their relationship and allegedly issued repeated threats of physical harm. It said due to the hostility and fearing for her safety, the woman left her parental home on July 18 after informing her mother about her intention to marry the man. The couple married in a temple on July 23 on their own free will and has been living together happily, it added. The high court then directed the station house office of the police station concerned to designate an official and sensitise him or her of the court order and provide immediate assistance to the couple in case of any complaint or threat. "The directions issued herein, particularly those concerning police protection, are purely preventive in nature, aimed at ensuring the petitioners' safety and safeguarding their right to life and liberty. They shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the truthfulness of the petitioners' claims, nor as any endorsement," it said. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)


Hindustan Times
10 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Choice to marry someone from different faith safeguarded by Constitution: Delhi High Court
New Delhi The choice to marry someone from a different faith is safeguarded under the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, even if it challenges social norms and family expectations, the Delhi High Court has held. (Representative photo) The choice to marry someone from a different faith is safeguarded under the fundamental right to life and personal liberty, even if it challenges social norms and family expectations, the Delhi High Court has held, while directing the Delhi Police to continue protecting an interfaith couple facing threats from their families. A bench of justice Sanjeev Narula made the observation on August 8, while dealing with a plea filed by a 26-year-old Muslim man and a 25-year-old Hindu woman, seeking police protection and accommodation in a safe house. In a petition filed last month, the couple asserted that despite solemnising their marriage after a relationship of over seven years, there was strong opposition from the woman's family. The petition said that despite writing to the deputy commissioner of police for the southeast district on July 23, requesting police protection, the police forcibly separated the woman from her husband and detained her at Nirmal Chhaya Shelter Home on July 24. The plea stated that the woman married the man voluntarily, without any coercion. On July 25, the high court directed the DCP to look into the matter personally and, if the woman affirmed her wish to live with her husband, to ensure appropriate arrangements for the couple's safety. The counsel for the woman's father, on August 8, asserted that his client was deeply troubled by his daughter's decision to marry the man without his consent and that he was concerned for his daughter's welfare. Considering the contentions, the court directed Delhi Police to continue providing them protection and accommodation in a safe house, till they solemnise their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. The bench said that parents' anguish over their daughter choosing her life partner without consultation cannot eclipse the right of an adult to choose a life partner, since Article 21 of the Constitution safeguards an individual's right to marry a person of one's choice. 'The constitutional guarantee under Article 21 enables every adult citizen may shape the course of their own life, free from fear, coercion or unlawful restraint. The choice to marry, especially across lines of faith, may test the resilience of social norms and familial expectations, yet in law, it remains a matter of personal liberty and individual autonomy, immune from any external veto. While the anguish of a parent is understandable, it cannot eclipse the rights of a major to select their life partner,' the court said. It added, 'The court is mindful of the anguish of the girl's father, who opposes the relationship on grounds that he perceives as legitimate and rooted in his concern for his daughter's welfare. However, upon attaining the age of majority, the right to make decisions regarding marriage becomes the individual's personal prerogative. Parental preference, however well-intentioned, cannot legally override that autonomy.' Noting the couple's allegation of being forcibly separated, the court directed the DCP to submit a report on whether any unlawful separation had occurred and, if so, to identify the officer responsible. The direction came after the woman claimed she was taken to a shelter home by the police against her will, while the police maintained that no coercion, unlawful action, or procedural lapse had taken place. The matter will next be heard on September 12. The same bench, in a similar plea filed by another couple, also ruled that a family's disapproval cannot override the right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and live together peacefully. 'The right of two consenting adults to choose each other as life partners and to live together in peace is a facet of their personal liberty, privacy, and dignity protected under Article 21. Family disapproval cannot curtail that autonomy,' the court said in an order on August 5.