The Delhi High Court on Saturday put on hold the Delhi government’s move to mandate school-level fee-regulation committees (SLFRCs) in private schools for the 2026–27 academic session, allowing schools to continue charging last year’s fees for now.

A bench of Chief Justice D. K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that while petitions challenging the February 1 notification remain pending, the constitution of SLFRCs will remain in abeyance.

Schools will be entitled to collect the same fees for the 2026–27 academic year as were charged in the previous session until fees are fixed or approved under the law. “Any exorbitant fees,” the bench said, “shall be regulated in accordance with law.”

The order was passed on petitions filed by several school associations, including the Delhi Public School Society, Action Committee Unaided Recognised Private Schools, The Forum of Minority Schools, Forum for Promotion of Quality Education for All, Rohini Educational Society and the Association of Public Schools.

The petitioners had sought a stay on the government notification that required schools to constitute SLFRCs within 10 days.

The court observed that, given the timelines laid down in the February 1 notification, it was unlikely that fees for individual schools could be fixed before April 1.

It noted that the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act allows schools to collect the previous year’s fee until a new fee is fixed or approved.

The bench said staying the notification at this stage would not prejudice students. It added that any fees collected during the pendency of the case would be subject to the outcome of the petitions, and schools would be liable to refund any excess amount.

“It would be expedient to defer the constitution of the SLFRC during the pendency of the petitions, which will be hard finally on March 12,” the court said.

The schools argued that the notification was legally unsustainable as it altered timelines prescribed under the Act for constituting SLFRCs.

The Delhi government, however, told the court that the “dates” mentioned in the Act were neither “sacrosanct” nor part of its “basic structure,” and that “slight tinkering” with the timelines as a one-time measure would survive judicial scrutiny.

It also argued that the law was meant to prevent commercialisation and profiteering, and that the notification would not cause irreparable loss to schools.

In its 34-page order, the court said the timelines under the notification were prima facie “unworkable,” especially given the time required to hear the petitions. It also pointed out gaps in the process laid down by the notification.

Under the Act, if an SLFRC fails to reach a unanimous decision on proposed fees, the matter must be referred to the District Fee Appellate Committee, which is expected to decide within 15 days.

The notification, however, does not provide any revised timeline for such a referral. “It is premature to presume that the SLFRC constituted by each of the schools shall be able to approve the proposed fee unanimously,” the court said.

“In case any of the SLFRCs is unable to approve the proposed fee unanimously, the next step is to refer the matter to the District Fee Appellate Committee. However, the notification does not provide for the revised timeline for reference to the District Fee Appellate Committee. At the same time, the Act permits the schools to collect the fee of the previous academic year during the pendency of the reference before the District Fee Appellate Committee,” it added.

The bench also took note of practical difficulties flagged by the schools, including the non-availability of audited financial statements and the requirement of holding physical meetings of parents to select committee members while final examinations are ongoing.

On this basis, it said the balance of convenience favoured the schools.

“Accordingly, it is directed that during the pendency of the present petitions, the operation and implementation of clauses 3(1) and (2) of the notification shall remain in abeyance and the petitioners shall be entitled to collect the same fee for the academic year 2026-27 as was collected for the previous academic year till the fee is fixed or approved in terms of the provisions of the Act and the Rules, subject to the outcome of these petitions,” the court ordered.

The February 1 gazette notification was issued to “smoothen” the implementation of the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act after the Supreme Court raised questions over the city government’s fee-fixation law.

It required every school to constitute an SLFRC within 10 days and submit its proposed fee structure for a three-year block starting from 2026–27 within 14 days of forming the committee