The Delhi government, through its Directorate of Education (DoE), has granted private schools in the capital a crucial 10-day extension to constitute mandatory committees for regulating fee hikes. The announcement was made before the Delhi High Court on Thursday, January 9, 2026.
Extended Deadlines for Compliance
The new deadlines are a direct result of the court's intervention. The earlier deadline of January 10 for forming the School-level Fee Regulation Committee (SLFRC) has been pushed to January 20. Furthermore, the date for school managements to submit their proposed fee increases to these committees has been extended from January 25 to February 5.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the DoE, communicated these extensions to a division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia. The bench had urged for the deadline relaxation during a hearing on a batch of petitions filed by private schools.
Court Refuses to Stay the New Fee Law
The core of the legal battle is the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Act, 2025, which came into force on December 10 last year. A pivotal feature of this legislation is the establishment of a three-tier committee system designed to audit and regulate fee hikes in private schools, aiming to end years of conflict between parents and institutions over arbitrary increases.
Despite the extension, the High Court bench firmly refused to stay a December 24 notification from the DoE. This notification had outlined the directions for constituting and operating the SLFRCs for the 2025-26 academic session. The court's refusal means the process mandated by the new law continues to move forward.
Legal Challenge from School Associations
The petitions challenging the law's constitutional validity have been filed by several school groups. One prominent petitioner is the Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private Schools, an association representing over 800 member schools.
Represented by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and advocate Kamal Gupta, the association has launched a strong critique against the legislation. Their petition labels the Act as "a result of populism" enacted with "no application of mind," and describes it as "malafide, biased, arbitrary, and malicious in nature."
A central legal argument raised is the question of legislative competence. The petitioners contend that since education is on the Concurrent List, the Delhi government lacks the authority to enact a fee regulation law when a central law—the Delhi School Education Act, 1973—is already in place.
Taking note of these serious contentions, the bench has issued formal notices to the Directorate of Education and the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, VK Saxena, seeking their official responses. The case has been scheduled for its next hearing on March 12, 2026.
The unfolding legal tussle marks a significant moment for education governance in the national capital, balancing the state's push for transparency and affordability against school managements' concerns over autonomy and financial viability.
