Click the Play button to listen to article

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a school challenging the rejection of its application for renewal of recognition, observing that the institute had acted negligently by admitting students despite being aware that its recognition had not been renewed. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 444]

The bench of Justice Vishal Mishra directed:

"The petitioner institution is negligent in functioning despite being aware of all deficiencies and non-renewal of their recognition, they admitted the students, therefore, this Court is not inclined to allow the writ petition. The petitioner/institution is directed to refund the fees charged by them from the students within a period of 30 days from today". 

The school was run by a society named Bans Pai Shiksha Avam Swasthya Samiti and was registered under the MP Society Registration Act, 1973 on October 8, 2007. The school applied online for renewal of recognition for the session 2026-27 to the Joint Director of the Directorate of Public Instruction on December 15, 2025, but the same was rejected on the ground that it did not fulfil the required criteria. 

The school thereafter filed an appeal before the Joint Director on March 6, 2026, but the same was also rejected. A second appeal was then filed by the school, but it was also rejected. 

The counsel for the school argued that due to the rejection of the renewal application, the careers of students who have taken admission are in jeopardy. It also referred to WP 21557 of 2022, wherein this court had granted interim relief. The school argued that it had already deposited the affiliation fees for the session and was ready to comply with any applicable terms and conditions. 

The court raised a specific query regarding the school's conduct in admitting students despite knowing that its affiliation was not renewed. The counsel for the petition could not tender an explainantion.

The court also noted the lack of material showing that the second appellate authority had rejected their plea.

The court took a strict view of the school's conduct in admitting students, noting that "they (school) were not in a position to admit the students but despite the same, they admitted the students at large and even charged fees from them for which the petitioner/institution was not eligible". 

Therefore, the court dismissed the petition and directed the school to refund fees charged by the admitted students within 30 days from the date of the order. The court further directed:

"this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.2/Commissioner, Directorate of Public Instructions, Bhopal and respondent No.3/Joint Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Narmadapuram Division Narmadapuram to ensure that the career of the students imparting education in the petitioner/institution should not suffer. Immediate steps to be taken by them to ensure that the students are admitted in some other school and their examination forms are duly filled". 

For Petitioner: Advocate Yogesh Lokhande

For State: Advocate Gajendra Parashar

Tags: