The Delhi government on Friday told the Delhi High Court that private schools cannot collect fees from April 1 for the new academic session unless the fee is determined and approved in accordance with the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act.

The submission was made while opposing pleas by several schools’ associations seeking a stay on the government’s February 1 notification directing private schools to constitute School-Level Fee Regulation Committees (SLFRCs) within 10 days.

Appearing for the Delhi government, Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju said staying the mandate would have “disastrous” consequences and that no prejudice would be caused to schools by forming the committees.

“My case is that schools cannot charge anything other than the approved fee under the Act [Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act]. They cannot collect from April 1 because the Act prohibits it. The Act prohibited for the earlier year also, but it has somehow been kept in abeyance. From April 1, 2026, if they want to collect fees, which is unregulated, they cannot do it," the senior law officer said on behalf of the Delhi government.

"Giving a proposal for fees is allowed (in the Act) prior to the start of the academic year. No prejudice will be caused," he added.

A bench of Chief Justice D. K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia was hearing the petitions challenging the February 1 notification, issued as a Removal of Difficulties Order.

Raju defended the notification, saying the fee-determination process had been initiated earlier than prescribed to ensure that fees are fixed before the new academic session begins.

He said the order was issued in the interest of schools, students and parents.

The court asked senior counsel appearing for the Action Committee Unaided Recognised Private Schools to explain why they were unwilling to constitute the SLFRCs.

Senior advocate Akhil Sibal argued that the February 1 notification is legally unsustainable as it changes the timeline prescribed under the Act.

He said the process must begin in July of the preceding academic year and accused the government of “rushing”.

He further submitted that the power to fix the fee has been given to someone else and that it was “practically impossible” to conclude the process for the upcoming academic session, as the law requires a unanimous decision on the SLFRCs.

The court indicated it would pass an order on the issue of stay of the notification on the next date of hearing. The matter has been listed for February 24.

The bench also extended till then the February 10 deadline set by the Delhi government for private schools to form the SLFRCs.

In its response to the petitions, the Directorate of Education said that if the Act is not implemented from April 1, it would defeat its objective of preventing profiteering and ensuring regulated fees from the beginning of the academic year 2026–27.

“If section 3 of the Act is interpreted to mean that in the absence of determination of fee, the school may charge such fee as it deems fit, it would enable schools to indulge in the very act of exploitative commercialisation and profiteering,” the response said.

“In view of all the aforesaid difficulties that the impugned Removal of Difficulties Order dated February 1, 2026, was issued to provide for a special one-time measure for the block of three academic years starting from 2026-27,” it added.

The February 1 gazette notification was issued after the Supreme Court raised questions over the new fee-fixation law.

It directs schools to constitute SLFRCs within 10 days of publication and to submit details of the proposed fee structure for the next three academic years within 14 days of forming the committees.

The committees will then fix the fees in accordance with the provisions of the Act.