https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296953 Private unaided schools, including minority institutions, remained amenable to writ scrutiny under Article 226 because education is a public duty and the complaint concerned fee collection during a pandemic-related breakdown. The Court held that limited judicial review was proper where schools sought fees without corresponding physical facilities and with reduced expenditure. Directions for temporary fee reduction, scrutiny of accounts, and a one-time hardship mechanism did not violate Articles 19(1)(g), 30(1) or privacy rights, since administration rights do not protect profiteering and financial scrutiny was narrowly confined to testing reasonableness. A limited pandemic-specific fee-relief regime was therefore justified, without affecting future autonomy. en-us Tue, 13 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Aug 2021 21:22:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296953 Private unaided schools, including minority institutions, remained amenable to writ scrutiny under Article 226 because education is a public duty and the complaint concerned fee collection during a pandemic-related breakdown. The Court held that limited judicial review was proper where schools sought fees without corresponding physical facilities and with reduced expenditure. Directions for temporary fee reduction, scrutiny of accounts, and a one-time hardship mechanism did not violate Articles 19(1)(g), 30(1) or privacy rights, since administration rights do not protect profiteering and financial scrutiny was narrowly confined to testing reasonableness. A limited pandemic-specific fee-relief regime was therefore justified, without affecting future autonomy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296953