Will the Centre act on the regulation following Citizen Rights Foundation raising alarm over high school fees as a contravention of the Right to Education and Equality?
The Department of Higher Education of the Union Ministry of Education, on Friday, instructed the University Grants Commission (UGC) to "examine and submit" a comprehensive report on the proposed Central Education Fee Regulatory Authority (CEFRA)—a statutory body to regulate standard school and higher education fees in India.
The order is issued in the wake of Bengaluru-based Citizen Rights Foundation (CRF), in its memorandum (dated May 9, 2025), urging Prime Minister Narendra Modi to initiate legislative and executive action on an urgent basis to curb the commercialisation of education and regulate school and higher education fees in the country.
The Foundation emphasized how the increasing gap between government schools and high-end private schools had increased social inequality, and the poor and middle-class households were being burdened and also pushed into debt in order to provide education for their children.
Declaring that the inability to regulate fees and prevent the commercialization of education was an immediate violation of the constitutional guarantee of equality and social justice, the CRF called for uniform legislation to control the fees, the government to provide affordable and equitable access to education to all citizens and close the corrupt practices in educational institutions through rigorous legislation and effective regulatory enforcement.
Quoting the 'Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka', (1992) 3 SCC 666, the Foundation reminded that the Supreme Court had categorically held that education was not a commodity and commercialization would have to be checked. Still, in the absence of a binding and enforceable regulatory framework, these constitutional obligations are largely going unfulfilled, it lamented.
Placing the emphasis on the Constitutional mandate, the CRF declared that the arbitrary charging of exorbitant fees breached the Right to Education that requires states to make free and compulsory education a provision for all children of six years of age to fourteen years. Article 14 ensures equality before the law. But the existing disparity in fees in educational institutions violates both, it averred.
The Supreme Court judgments in the 'T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002)' and 'Modern Dental College v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016)' have asserted the necessity of regulation of fees in order to avoid the commodification of education. The judiciary sees fee regulation as legitimate as well as necessary. Although institutions are given autonomy, profiteering is not allowed, opined CRF, voicing alarm at the absence of a single fee regulator for education that has let the "donation culture" run rampant in private institutions.
In its suggestions, CRF recommended that a central law like the Electricity Act, 2003 be passed to introduce a Central Education Fee Regulatory Authority with binding functions to regulate fees, check exploitation, and impose common fee structures throughout India. State Education Fee Committees should have binding power and penalising powers for violations (along the lines of Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of Fee) Act, 2009), and fee structures at similar levels of schooling (primary, secondary, higher secondary) should be uniform, with only objective justification for minor variations (such as for infrastructure costs) subject to regulatory approval. It urged the imposition of the Prohibition of Capitation Fee Act firmly with serious sanctions in the form of cancellation of affiliations, hefty fines, and criminal prosecution of offenders. Accepting that the majority of private schools are now controlled by or patronized by elected members and their associates and friends, the CRF demanded that those people connected with schools who are convicted of fee offenses be disqualified from public office or election, as is the disqualification under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
To address admission malpractices, all school-level admissions should be channelled through centralised government counselling and admission portals, similar to the NEET and KCET models for professional courses. This will eradicate discretion-based admissions and provide transparency, stated the CRF, which urged that an amendment to the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 be made to provide detailed and enforceable provisions on fee regulation and anti-capitation measures instead of leaving the issue to the discretion of the state.
After the CRF's letter to the PM, the Cabinet Secretary had given an "urgent communication" (dated June 3, 2025) to the Department of Higher Education, which has now requested the UGC to give a complete framework for CEFRA.
