Bangalore, April 15: The Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore today made public its stand against the proposed fee cut through an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court.

The move comes a day ahead of the apex court’s hearing on the matter.

The submission goes against the claim of human resource development minister Murli Manohar Joshi on Sunday that the institute had agreed to fall in line with his proposal. IIMB is the second B-school after Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad to oppose the fee reduction.

The affidavit, signed by IIMB director Prakash G. Apte, was handed over to the Supreme Court by the institute’s counsel S. Vaidyanathan. “In our affidavit, we have given the logic and reasons for opposing the fee cut. Among the reasons are that such a move will have an impact on the long-term financial position of the institute,” Apte said.

The institute has told the court it will use Rs 30,000 of the Rs 1.52-lakh fee collected from each student and set aside the remaining amount till a verdict is pronounced on the public interest litigation that has challenged the Centre’s February 5 fee-slash order. IIMA had also promised to make a similar provision.

Apte said even though S.M. Datta, the chairman of the board of governors, had decided that the society under which the institute is registered should take the final call, IIMB decided to apprise the apex court of its stand. “The society could still meet and take a decision, but we thought we should inform the court of our stand before its next hearing,” he added.

But Datta’s move to ask the society to decide has irked some board members. They had asked the chairman to draw up a resolution that the institute would accept a fee-cut on three conditions: a written commitment from the Centre that it would make good the shortfall with an upfront payment; no interference in the institute’s autonomy and a commitment that the Union government would work to maintain the B-school’s standard of excellence. The board had authorised Datta to write out its resolution after a meeting on March 27.

Apte would not comment on the differences within the board, saying: “Some members are bound to have divergent opinions.”

The society, comprising board members and faculty members, will discuss the matter early next month.