Schools kept DoE out of loop on fee

Times of India: New Delhi: Sunday, 09 November 2014.

Raising student fees without paying teachers' as per the Sixth Pay Commission's recommendations isn't the only violation private unaided schools are guilty of. Replies to a batch of RTI queries, many of them filed with the northwest district, show that numerous schools have decided on a fee hike at meetings where no Directorate of Education nominee was present.

The former MLA of Model Town, Akhilesh Pati Tripathi, had written to the deputy director (education) of the northwest school district, Neena Kumari, seeking documents showing schools had the go-ahead from the necessary authorities when deciding on increases.

"Several parents in our area have complained of increasing exploitation by private recognized schools by means of exorbitant fees and hidden charges," writes Tripathi. He had specifically asked for papers from five private-unaided schools in the district, the names of the DoE nominees in whose presence the fee hikes were finalized and increase in fee in percentage and absolute terms from the academic session 2010-11 to 2014-15.

Activist Mohit Goel had, in 2013, filed a batch of RTIs seeking, not just information on increases but also what role exactly the department plays in the process. He'd asked whether it's "important for a DoE nominee to be present for a discussion before fee is hiked" and if the DoE takes action against any officer who wasn't present at the meeting. To this, the department had replied, "Yes, it is important for a nominee to be present for a discussion before fee is hiked in recognized unaided private schools. However, as per available record, no such complaint has been received."

Goel had asked for the number of management meetings each DoE had attended in the previous two years and zone 10 responded with, "No such information is maintain[ed] in this zone in materialistic (sic) form." Zone 9 had the same reply. Documents from several public schools say that the directorate's nominee wasn't present at the meetings of the PTA.

Tables furnished by the department show increases of over 20% at some schools. "Guidelines for increasing fees were issued in 2010 and the department's nominee is meant to ensure these are being followed. But they weren't present in any of the meetings. The responses of the department have been vague, evasive," says Goel.