Delhi govt tables education bill to curb ‘arbitrary' fee hikes
The draft bill, which was approved by the Delhi Cabinet in April, covers all 1,677 private unaided schools in the Capital. It proposes sweeping reforms to the fee regulation system, including a three-tier grievance redressal mechanism, penalties of up to ₹10 lakh for violations, and a mandatory role for parents in deciding fee structures.
'Today, I bring before this House a permanent solution to a long-ignored issue… The purpose of education is not to generate profit, but to ensure learning and nation-building,' said Sood, invoking the central government's resolution of 'legacy issues' such as the Ram Mandir, Article 370, and the Chenab Bridge.
'The Delhi government is similarly resolving critical and complex issues -- one of the most pressing being the unchecked rise in private school fees,' he said.
Sood said the bill takes a bottom-up approach. 'This is a true embodiment of government of the people, by the people, for the people. Parents will now have a say in the decision-making process.'
A discussion on the bill is expected in the Assembly on Tuesday.
Chief minister Rekha Gupta endorsed the bill, writing on X that it would 'strictly curb the commercialization of education. Action will now be taken against those who are selling education like a product.'
The bill proposes the formation of three key committees: the School Level Fee Regulation Committee, the District Fee Appellate Committee, and the Revision Committee. It bars any school from collecting fees in excess of what has been approved under the act.
The school-level committee – comprising parents, teachers, and management – must be set up by July 15 each year. Fee proposals must be submitted by July 31 and approved by September 15. If the committee fails to decide on the fees, the school can escalate the matter to the District Appellate Committee by September 30. Disputes must be resolved within 45 days at each appellate level, with the final authority resting with the Revision Committee, whose rulings will be binding for three years.
Section 8 of the bill lists the criteria for determining fees – school location, infrastructure, teacher salaries, and revenue surplus. Section 12 details penalties: unauthorized hikes can invite fines between ₹1– ₹10 lakh, doubling every 20 days until compliance. Repeat offenders will be required to refund excess fees and may lose recognition if violations continue.
Principals of several schools welcomed the move.
'This is a positive step toward ensuring that fee structures reflect the quality of education provided,' said Sudha Acharya, principal of ITL Public School, Dwarka. 'Most schools are already preparing to set up the required committees. We're waiting to see how the law will be implemented.'
Minakshi Kushwaha, principal of Birla Vidya Niketan in Pushp Vihar said the bill may not be able to solve the long standing issue of fee hikes, adding that the bill needs to be revisited. 'Firstly, the clause of social inclusion where a person from backward community has to be included in the committee may not be feasible for each school. Secondly, formation of committees and how their members are selected may lead to either kickbacks from the school or standoff between parents and the school in case of disagreement. Finally, the government should not dilute the autonomy of private schools in determining their fees,' she said.
However, the opposition Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) slammed the legislation, calling it a 'sham bill' that legalises profiteering and sidelines parent voices.
Leader of Opposition Atishi demanded that it be sent to a select committee. 'After letting private schools hike fees unchecked for four months, the BJP now brings a sham bill that hands control to school owners, blocks parent voices, and protects profiteers. The AAP will fight it in the Assembly, on the streets, and in court. We have demanded that the bill be sent to a Select Committee and all fee hikes frozen at 2024–25 levels,' Atishi said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
All private schools to follow new fee regulation law, says Delhi education minister
New Delhi, The Delhi government has brought all 1,700 private schools in the city under a new fee regulation law, with provisions for parental participation and veto power on fee hikes, Education Minister Ashish Sood said on Friday. Speaking at a "Parents' Town Hall" in Janakpuri, Sood said the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025, passed in the Monsoon Session of the Assembly, seeks to end arbitrary fee increases and ensure transparency in the fee fixation process. About 200 parents attended the interaction, where the minister explained key provisions of the law, including penalties for non-compliance. Schools that raise fees without government approval will face fines ranging from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 10 lakh, with double penalties if excess charges are not refunded, he said, according to an official statement. The bill also grants the Director of Education powers similar to those of a sub-divisional magistrate to ensure uniform action against violations, it stated. Committees comprising parents, teachers, school management and government representatives will be involved in setting school fees, it read. Sood said the new law closes a loophole in the 1973 rules, under which only 300 schools were covered for the fee regulation. "Now, all private schools in Delhi will come under the ambit of fee regulation," he said. The minister criticised previous governments for failing to establish a transparent system for private school fee control. "Those who claimed to have brought an education revolution did not make real improvements in government schools," he said, adding that many parents opted for private schools because of the poor state of public education facilities. As per the bill, decisions on fee proposals must be made by school-level committees by July 15, district-level committees by July 30, and finalised by September. If no decision is reached within 45 days, the matter will be referred to an appellate committee. Sood said the law was drafted after consultations with parents and education experts to curb the commercialisation of education and safeguard the interests of students. PTI Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
MyVoice: Views of our readers 16th Aug 2025
Rahul's dereliction of protocol The decision of the Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi to absent himself from the nation's Independence Day celebration at the Red Fort is not merely a dereliction of protocol but also of symbolism. In the theatre of democracy, moments such as these transcend partisanship; they are occasions when we set aside our ideological cudgels to affirm a shared national identity. The absence sends an unfortunate semaphore: that political schism can supersede patriotic solidarity. One need not be in concord with the government to stand in concert with the Republic. Rahul Gandhi did not diminish the government but the gravitas of the Opposition's own constitutional role. Independence Day is a day when the tricolour should eclipse the party flag. Mohit Rawal, Ujjain Modi erred by praising RSS I endorse the criticism against Prime Minister Narendra Modi's address to the nation on I- Day in which he praised the RSS on its 100th year. This has been condemned by CPI(M) leader M A Baby, who pointed out that RSS has a dubious record and it was banned after Gandhi's assassination. Modi may be seeking RSS support in the wake of the political turmoil that has emerged after Rahul Gandhi's 'vote chor' accusations. Dr T Ramadas, Visakhapatnam Testing times for Modi This is further to your editorial 'Challenges galore for Modi' (Aug 15). It is truly testing time for India, and the BJP-led NDA government at the Centre, particularly when the opposition is irrationally up in arms against the ECI and EVMs. They are also questioning the deletion of names in the revised electoral roll in Bihar despite the poll panel's clarification in this regard. The previous one decade of the BJP rule was truly creditable with various achievements, which many people thought would be impossible like the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, 'Operation Sindoor', removal of 'triple talaq' and implementation of the 'Waqf Amendment Act'. The divisive politics being played out by the opposition, coupled with the US targeting India with a 50 per cent tariff on exports to America, is unmissable. K V Raghuram, Wayanad Centre should have a contingency plan In the grand bazaar of Indian politics, 'deep state' is on a mission to fracture the BJP by creating political chaos. It is essential that the Narendra Modi government at the Centre develops a serious contingency plan to counter future tensions. Whether the claims to provoke disruptions prove accurate or not, the government cannot remain silent at a time when the nation sits in the crosshair of a high-stakes geopolitical game. This is even as the Election Commission is determined to improve accuracy and efficiency. K R Srinivasan, Secunderabad-3 Civic officials must act I wish to highlight the growing distress of residents in low-lying areas like Malakpet, Kishanbagh, Jiyaguda, and Chaderghat as the Musi River overflows following heavy rains and the opening of the Himayat Sagar floodgates. Every monsoon, these neighbourhoods face inundation, road closures, and evacuation. While immediate steps such as traffic diversions and rescue efforts are appreciated, they unfortunately remain short-term fixes. It is imperative for the authorities to implement long-term measures—strengthening embankments, desilting the Musi, and improving drainage—to prevent recurring crises. It calls for a permanent solution. Without proactive action, thousands will continue to suffer the agony of heavy losses and displacement each year. Uthkarsha, St Francis college for Women Push carts causing obstruction People from Vijayawada are subject to several hardships because of push carts that have been left on the busy Sivalayam street, Satyanarayana puram. No one has a clue about who has left the carts. These are also causing worry to the locals as they have remained unclaimed for a long time. This is causing inconvenience to nearby bank customers, hospital patients and others, who park their vehicles here. It is also a posing threat to incriminating activities. We urge the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation to remove the carts and bring respite to the people. M Janardhana Rao, Vijayawada-520011
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Bihar's electoral overhaul: Balancing integrity and inclusion in India's democracy
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) recent initiative to undertake a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has ignited a fervent debate, blending legal imperatives with political undercurrents. Announced in June, this comprehensive exercise, the first of its kind in the state since 2003, aims to update voter lists with July 1, 2025, as the qualifying date. With Bihar's Assembly elections looming later this year, the timing has amplified concerns about potential disenfranchisement, particularly among migrant workers and marginalized communities. Yet, at its core, the SIR represents a statutory effort to safeguard the sanctity of India's democratic process—one that demands a balanced scrutiny of its legal foundations, procedural rigor, and societal impacts. The ECI's authority to conduct such revisions is firmly rooted in the Constitution. Article 324 grants the Commission sweeping powers over the 'superintendence, direction, and control' of elections, including the preparation and maintenance of accurate electoral rolls. This is reinforced by Article 326, which enshrines universal adult suffrage, entitling every Indian citizen aged 18 or above—barring disqualifications like non-residence or criminal convictions—to vote. These provisions underscore a commitment to inclusivity while empowering the ECI to eliminate inaccuracies that could undermine electoral fairness. Parliament has translated these constitutional ideals into actionable law through the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Section 21 of the Act explicitly authorizes the ECI to prepare and revise electoral rolls, a process elaborated in the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Under Rule 25, revisions can be intensive, summary, or hybrid, allowing flexibility based on need. An intensive revision, as chosen for Bihar, involves meticulous steps outlined in Rules 4 to 23, including door-to-door enumeration and verification. This ensures thoroughness, requiring enumerators to collect details from households and cross-check against a list of 11 specified documents, such as passports, driving licenses, or ration cards—expanded from seven in previous exercises, which the Supreme Court has noted as a 'voter-friendly' measure. The rationale for reviving an intensive approach after over two decades is straightforward yet profound. Bihar's population has surged, with urbanisation and migration reshaping its demographics. The 2003 revision, the last comprehensive one, predates significant shifts, including the exodus of millions for work opportunities elsewhere. Bogus entries—deceased voters, duplicates, or those who have relocated—persist as a perennial threat, potentially distorting outcomes and violating the 'one person, one vote' principle. The ECI's drive seeks to purge these anomalies while enrolling new voters, especially the youth turning 18. As of July 12, over 74 per cent of Bihar's approximately 7.9 crore electors had submitted enumeration forms, indicating robust participation in the process. This high response rate suggests the exercise is gaining traction, though challenges remain in reaching remote or transient populations. However, SIR has not escaped controversy. Critics, including civil society groups, allege it risks mass exclusion, with reports emerging of draft rolls containing errors like incorrect photographs or entries for deceased individuals. Petitions before the Supreme Court, led by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), claim that around 65 lakh names were omitted from the draft roll without adequate justification, disproportionately affecting migrants, the poor, and minorities. These groups argue that the process violates statutory rights, as voters have a legal entitlement to remain on rolls unless proven ineligible. The exclusion of Aadhaar as a verification document has been praised for broadening options but questioned for its potential to complicate verification in a state where digital access varies. In response, the ECI has emphasised that SIR is a routine purification effort, not a deletion drive. It has assured the Supreme Court that no name will be removed without prior notice, a reasoned order, and appeal rights. The Commission maintains that it is not legally obligated to publish a separate list of excluded voters or reasons for omissions, viewing the draft roll as a provisional document open to corrections. During ongoing hearings, the apex court has sought details on the 2003 revision's methodology, signalling a desire for transparency in historical precedents. Notably, while individual voters have filed thousands of objections, no recognized political party has formally flagged errors in the draft, per ECI reports. This absence of partisan complaints underscores that the controversy may stem more from apprehension than widespread malpractice. The debate extends beyond Bihar, highlighting systemic tensions in India's electoral framework. Similar revisions in other states, like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in recent years, have faced scrutiny for alleged biases, yet they have ultimately bolstered roll accuracy. The political stakes are high in Bihar: the state's 243 Assembly seats could see shifts if migrant voters—estimated at over two crore—are underrepresented. Demographic data from the 2011 Census, adjusted for growth, reveals that Scheduled Castes and Muslims, often economically vulnerable, form significant voter blocs; any perceived exclusion could erode trust in the system. Objectively, the ECI's actions align with global best practices for electoral hygiene. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom periodically purge rolls to combat fraud, though with safeguards against voter suppression. In India, the ECI's recent delisting of 334 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) as part of broader clean-up efforts reflects a proactive stance against electoral malpractices. However, implementation on the ground matters. House-to-house surveys, while thorough, can be susceptible to human error or bias in a polarized environment. Enhancing digital tools, such as the Voter Helpline app, could mitigate this, allowing self-verification and reducing dependency on enumerators. The Supreme Court's observations in related matters offer valuable guidance. In the ADR vs. ECI case on electronic voting machines, the court cautioned against 'blind distrust' that breeds scepticism, urging evidence-based reforms and trust-building through dialogue and transparency. As echoed in Paragraph 37 of that judgment, democracy thrives on harmony among citizens, judiciary, representatives, and electoral bodies. Para 38 expresses hope that the system will reflect the electorate's true mandate. These principles apply aptly here: while the ECI's authority to decide the timing and mode of SIR is exclusive, fostering public confidence requires proactive disclosure and inclusive outreach. Bihar's SIR embodies the delicate balance between electoral purity and inclusivity. Legally sound and procedurally robust, it addresses long-standing flaws in voter lists, yet its success hinges on equitable execution. As petitions unfold in the Supreme Court, stakeholders must prioritize evidence over rhetoric. A transparent, participatory process will not only fortify Bihar's upcoming polls but also reinforce India's democratic resilience. By embracing continuous improvement, as the apex court advocates, we can ensure every eligible voice is heard, unmarred by doubt or exclusion. (The writer is a senior Advocate)
