Latest news with #FeeRegulatoryAuthority
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
FRA approved fees for 695 colleges after deadline, claims student body
MUMBAI: A youth organisation has accused Maharashtra's Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA) of violating state law by approving fee proposals from nearly 695 unaided professional colleges well past the statutory deadline of October 31, 2024. FRA approved fees for 695 colleges after deadline, claims student body In a letter to the principal secretary of the higher and technical education department, Yuva Sena — the youth wing of Shiv Sena (UBT) — alleged that the FRA's decision flouts provisions of the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fees) Act, 2015. Kalpesh Yadav, state joint secretary of Yuva Sena, cited Clause 14 of the Act, which mandates that colleges submit their fee proposals by October 31 for the next academic year beginning in June. 'If an institute misses this deadline, it cannot revise or hike fees for the upcoming academic year,' Yadav said, adding that colleges can only challenge FRA's decision within 15 days, and FRA must deliver a final verdict before March 31. 'This year, the FRA repeatedly extended the deadline even after October 31 and has now allowed submissions until August 15. This is a blatant violation of the law,' Yadav claimed. He warned that if the state government fails to intervene, Yuva Sena is prepared to seek judicial remedy. Responding to the allegations, FRA member Adv. Dharmendra Mishra acknowledged the statutory timelines but defended the authority's actions. He said the FRA's internal norms require colleges to seek annual fee approvals to ensure transparency and prevent unjustified hikes. 'Colleges are allowed to skip one year of revision — but only without increasing fees. In all other years, they must approach FRA for approval. If we reject late submissions outright, colleges might sidestep the process entirely and impose arbitrary fees on students,' Mishra said. He explained that the FRA accepts late submissions with penalties to ensure fees remain regulated. Mishra also disclosed that one college has filed a petition in the High Court challenging the FRA's functioning and the constitutional validity of the Act itself. 'The matter has been pending for four years, but we are clear: all colleges must come to us annually for fee regulation. We will also recommend changes to the Act to formalise this requirement,' he added. Directors missing from key FRA meetings Yadav further raised concerns about poor departmental representation in FRA meetings. 'As per the law, directors of technical and medical education departments are ex-officio FRA members. But they have skipped at least 205 meetings where college fees were finalised,' he said. Another FRA member, while confirming these absences, said stronger departmental participation is essential for a more robust and accountable regulatory framework.
Time of India
18-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Navi Mumbai court issues process against Agnel Law College principal, director for fee overcharge
A Navi Mumbai court has ordered legal proceedings against the principal and director of Agnel School of Law following a complaint by a former student. The complaint alleges that the institution overcharged fees, violating the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions Act. MUMBAI: A judicial magistrate court in Navi Mumbai ordered the issuance of process against the principal and director of Agnel School of Law, Vashi, in connection with a complaint alleging overcharging of fees in violation of the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Fees) Act, 2015. AA Babar, Judicial Magistrate First Class Court Belapur, directed the issuance of process under Section 227 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for offences punishable under Sections 318(3) and 316(1) of the BNS, 2023. The complaint, filed by a former student, alleges that the college collected Rs. 8,000 per annum in excess of the fee fixed by the Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA), resulting in overcharges of Rs. 24,000 over a three-year period (2020–2023). It is alleged that the approved annual fee was Rs. 24,030, while the college charged Rs. 32,030. Despite attempts to resolve the issue internally with the college principal, Dr Rajesh Sakhare, and director, Dr Ambrish Patnigere, the complainant claims that no assurance was given regarding a refund of the excess fees. With no recourse left, the student approached Vashi Police Station and subsequently moved the court. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like เทรดทองCFDsกับโบรกเกอร์ที่เชื่อถือได้| เปิดบัญชีวันนี้ IC Markets สมัคร Undo The advocate representing the respondent institution argued that the dispute is civil in nature, falling within the purview of the Fee Regulatory Authority, and challenged the complainant's locus standi. The respondent also placed on record a compliance report submitted to FRA dated April 5, 2024, and a copy of the relevant state legislation to support their claim. Repeated calls to Dr Patnigere went unanswered. College lawyer Sanjana Mandlik also refused to talk on the issue. However, after a detailed review of the complaint, supporting documents, and verification statement on oath, the magistrate held that there exists prima facie material to proceed and ascertain the respondent's defence. The court emphasised that a matter may give rise to both civil and criminal liability and rejected the argument that the criminal complaint could not be entertained solely because a civil remedy was available. 'A law college, which imparts legal education, is supposed to be the most important pillar in shaping an advocate's ethics and principles, and if they themselves start cheating their students, what kind of quality advocacy can we expect in this country? Therefore, complainant Venkatesh Jairam decided to take a stand,' said Vinay V Nair, counsel for the complainant. The magistrate also directed the office to re-register the matter as a regular criminal case and update the case records accordingly.
