FATHER THOMAS SHINGARE AND ORS. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

FATHER THOMAS SHINGARE AND ORS. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

No offence of collection of capitation fee can be made out where State has not fixed any approved rates of fees for unaided minority institution. Thus, criminal proceedings are unsustainable, and State cannot impose restrictions except for ensuring excellence in education.

Parties
Appellants: Father Thomas Shingare and Ors.; Respondents: State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal; Writ Petition / Supreme Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal and writ petition disposed of; criminal proceedings quashed.
Legal Topics
Minority Educational Institutions, Capitation Fee, State Regulation of Education, Article 30(1) Constitutional Rights
Constitutional Law Education Law Criminal Law Minority Educational Institutions Capitation Fee State Regulation of Education Article 30(1) Constitutional Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father Thomas Shingare and Ors.

Appellants

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal; Writ Petition / Supreme Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether unaided minority educational institutions are subject to State-imposed restrictions on fee collection under the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1987
  2. 2 Whether collection of fees by unaided minority school violates Section 7 of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the Act is ultra vires Article 30(1) of Constitution in application to unaided minority educational institutions

Ratio Decidendi

No offence of collection of capitation fee can be made out where State has not fixed any approved rates of fees for unaided minority institution. Thus, criminal proceedings are unsustainable, and State cannot impose restrictions except for ensuring excellence in education.

Court Disposition

Appeal and writ petition disposed of; criminal proceedings quashed.

Orders

  • Criminal proceedings launched by respondent No. 2 are quashed.
  • Appeal and writ petition disposed of in above terms.