Justice (Retired) Alok Baran Pal vs The State of Tripura and Ors.

TRHC010005832026
Page 1 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA



W.A. No.32/2026

Justice (Retired) Alok Baran Pal, Son of Late Dina Nath Pal, resident of 293,
T.G. Road, Krishnanagar, Agartala, P.O.-Agartala, P.S.-West Agartala,
District-West Tripura, PIN-799001.
……… Appellant(s).
V E R S U S
1. The State of Tripura, represented by the Chief Secretary, Government of
Tripura, New Secretariat Complex, Kunjaban, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-
799010.

2. The Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Tripura, New Secretariat
Complex, Kunjaban, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799010.

3. The Director, Higher Education, Government of Tripura, Office Lane,
Agartala, West Tripura, Pin-799001.
……… Respondent(s).


For Appellant(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate,
Mr. Saugat Datta, Advocate.




For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Debbarma, Addl. G.A.

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT

Date of hearing & judgment : 02.09.2026 .

Whether fit for reporting : NO .



JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)


Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.
Saugat Datta, counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Mangal Debbarma,
Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
2. This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the judgment dt.16.05.2025
in WP(C) No.253 of 2025 of the learned Single Judge.
3. The appellant had filed the said Writ Petition contending that he
was a retired High Court Judge and he had been made a Member on
10.06.2010 of the Committee constituted by the State Government for

TRHC010005832026
Page 2 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

determination of the fee structure in respect of private technical institutions in
the State of Tripura as it’s Chairman. He contends that after the said
appointment as Member of the Committee on 10.06.2010, he was not given
any staff or infrastructure and he was also not given any remuneration.
4. In the Writ Petition, the prayer is for payment of remuneration to
him for holding the post of Chairman of the Private Technical Institutions Fee
Structure Regulatory Committee w.e.f. 01.12.2018.
5. According to the petitioner, till the said date of 01.12.2018, he
was holding some other office and so, he is not claiming any remuneration for
the period prior to 01.12.2018.
6. The respondents unfortunately had rejected his claim for
remuneration on 06.05.2023.
7. When he filed the Writ Petition, the learned Single Judge
dismissed the Writ Petition holding, inter alia , that though the appellant’s
appointment was possibly related to the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Islamic Academy of Education and another v. State of Karnataka and
1
others , on the basis of which the memorandum dt.10.06.2010 was issued,
subsequently Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas replaced him from 15.02.2016,
and thereafter it was felt that the services of the appellant were not necessary.
Learned Single Judge held that merely because the committee was not
reconstituted and it did not come into effect, the earlier committee of which
the appellant was Chairman, cannot be said to exist and cannot also be said
that the appellant is entitled for remuneration. According to the learned Single
Judge, the proceeding dt.10.06.2010 shows that the assignment was given to

1
(2003) 6 SCC 697

TRHC010005832026
Page 3 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

the appellant on honorary basis and that it was not a regular appointment
governed by Service Rules and on the day Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas had
given his willingness, the appellant ceased to exist as Chairman.

8. Challenging the said judgment, this Writ Appeal is filed.
9. Counsel for the appellant contended that the learned Single Judge
erred in denying reliefs to the appellant, who was a retired Judge of the High
Court, and who had been admittedly appointed on 10.06.2010 by a proceeding
issued by the State Government after approval of His Excellency the Governor
as Chairman of the Committee for determination of fee structure in respect of
Private Technical Institutions in the State of Tripura. He also contended that
the learned Single Judge erred in holding that when Justice Jayanta Kumar
Biswas had given his willingness to replace the appellant as Chairman on
15.02.2016, the appellant automatically stood replaced. According to the
counsel for the appellant, there is no notification for reconstitution of the said
committee with Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas as the Chairman.
10. Learned Addl. Government Advocate supported the judgment of
the learned Single Judge.
11. We have noted the submissions of both sides and also perused the
record.
12. There is no pleading in the Writ Petition filed by the appellant
that the appellant had in any of the academic years starting from 10.06.2010
till 1.12.2018 invited applications from private technical institutions proposing
to fix the fee for the following academic year and has conducted any exercise
for determination of such a fee structure. Merely because the said committee

TRHC010005832026
Page 4 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

apparently was constituted on 10.06.2010, the appellant cannot claim
remuneration when he had not turned out any work.
13. It is unfortunate that while accepting his appointment as
Chairman of the said committee, the appellant had not thought it fit to
ascertain the terms and conditions of such appointment including the
remuneration for discharging services as a Chairman of the committee. May
be he thought it fit not to claim such remuneration as long as he was being
paid remuneration for discharging other duties till 2018.
14. The mere fact that Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas had given his
willingness on 15.02.2016 to be Chairman of the pre-regulatory committee
does not ipso facto reconstitute the said committee without a notification
being issued in that regard by the State Government.
15. But the fact remains that without determining the fee structure for
private technical institutions in any academic year, the appellant cannot
justifiably claim remuneration for the said period.
16. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant any relief to the appellant
in this Writ Appeal.
17. However, we are distressed that the State Government has taken
the question of implementing the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case
of Islamic Academy of Education (supra) casually and had merely
constituting the Fee Regulatory Committee on paper, without actually making
it operational by framing rules for remuneration, staff etc. Thereby it is
allowing private technical institutions in the State of Tripura to demand and
collect fee for technical courses as per their whims and fancies without any
regulation.

TRHC010005832026
Page 5 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

18. In paragraphs-16, 19 and 20 of the said judgment, the Supreme
Court has held as under:
“ 16 . That brings us to the question as to how the
management of both minority and non-minority professional
colleges can admit students in the quota allotted to them.
Undoubtedly the majority judgment has kept in mind the sad
reality that there are a large number of professional colleges
which indulge in profiteering and/or charging of capitation fees.
It is for this reason that the majority judgment provides that in
professional colleges admission must be on the basis of merit. As
has been rightly submitted, it is impossible to control
profiteering/charging of capitation fees unless it is ensured that
admission is on the basis of merit. Also, as has been rightly
pointed out, if a student is required to appear at more than one
entrance test it would lead to great hardship. The application
fees charged by each institute, even though they may be only
Rs.500 to Rs.1000 for each institute, would impose a heavy
burden on the students who will necessarily have to apply to a
number of colleges. Further, as has boon rightly pointed out,
students would have to arrange for transport from and to and
stay at various places if they have to appear for individual tests
conducted by each college. If a student has to go for test to each
institute it is possible that he/she may not be able to reach, in
time, the venue of a test of a particular institute. In our view what
is necessary is a practical approach keeping in mind the need for
a merit-based selection. Paragraph 68 provides that admission
by the management can be by a common entrance test held by
"itself or by the State/University". The words "common entrance
test" clearly indicate that each institute cannot hold a separate
test. We thus hold that the management could select students, of
their quota, either on the basis of the common entrance test
conducted by the State or on the basis of a common entrance test
to be conducted by an association of all colleges of a particular

TRHC010005832026
Page 6 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

type in that State e.g. medical, engineering or technical etc. The
common entrance test, held by the association, must be for
admission to all colleges of that type in the State. The option of
choosing, between either of these tests, must be exercised before
issuing of prospectus and after intimation to the concerned
authority and the Committee set up hereinafter. If any
professional college chooses not to admit from the common
entrance test conducted by the association then that college must
necessarily admit from the common entrance test conducted by
the State. After holding the common entrance test and
declaration of results the merit list will immediately be placed on
the notice-board of all colleges which have chosen to admit as
per this test. A copy of the merit list will also be forthwith sent to
the concerned authority and the Committee. Selection of students
must then be strictly on the basis of merit as per that merit list.
Of course, as indicated earlier, minority colleges will be entitled
to fill up their quota with their own students on the basis of inter
se merit amongst those students. The list of students admitted,
along with the rank number obtained by the student, the fees
collected and all such particulars and details as may be required
by the concerned authority or the Committee must be submitted
to them forthwith. The question paper and the answer papers
must be preserved for such period as the concerned authority or
Committee may indicate. If it is found that any student has been
admitted dehors merit, penalty can be imposed on that institute
and in appropriate cases recognition/affiliation may also be
withdrawn.
xxx xxx xxx
19 . We now direct that the respective State Governments
do appoint a permanent Committee which will ensure that the
tests conducted by the association of colleges to fair and
transparent. For each State a separate Committee shall be
formed. The Committee would be headed by a retired Judge of

TRHC010005832026
Page 7 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

the High Court. The Judge is to be nominated by the Chief
Justice of that State. The other member, to be nominated by the
Judge, would be a doctor or an engineer of eminence (depending
on whether the institution is medical or engineering/technical).
The Secretary of the State in charge of Medical or Technical
Education, as the case may be, shall also be a member and act as
the Secretary of the Committee. The Committee will be free to
nominate/co-opt an independent person of repute in the field of
education as well as one of the Vice-Chancellors of the
University in that State so that the total number of persons on the
Committee do not exceed five. The Committee shall have powers
to oversee the tests to be conducted by the association. This
would include the power to call for the proposed question
paper(s), to know the names of the paper-setters and examiners
and to check the method adopted to ensure papers are not
leaked. The Committee shall supervise and ensure that the test is
conducted in a fair and transparent manner. The Committee
shall have the power to permit an institution, which has been
established and which has been permitted to adopt its own
admission procedure for the last, at least, 25 years, to adopt its
own admission procedure and if the Committee feels that the
needs of such an institute are genuine, to admit, students of their
community, in excess of the quota allotted to them by the State
Government. Before exempting any institute or varying in
percentage of quota fixed by the State, the State Government
must be heard before the Committee. It is clarified that different
percentage of quota for students to be admitted by the
management in each minority or non-minority unaided
professional college(s) shall be separately fixed on the basis of
their need by the respective State Governments and in care of
any dispute as regards fixation of percentage of quota, it will be
open to the management to approach the Committee. It is also
clarified that no institute, which has not been established and

TRHC010005832026
Page 8 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

which has not followed its own admission procedure for the last,
at least, 25 years, shall be permitted to apply for or be granted
exemption from admitting students in the manner set out
hereinabove.
20 . Our direction for setting up two sets of Committees in
the States has been passed under Article 142 of the Constitution
of India which shall remain in force till appropriate legislation is
enacted by Parliament. The expenses incurred on the setting up
of such Committees shall be borne by each State. The
infrastructural needs and provision for allowance and
remuneration of the Chairman and other members of the
Committee shall also be borne by the respective State
Government.”

19. Instead of implementing the above Supreme Court judgment in
the spirit in which it has been delivered, for almost 23 years the State
Government has ignored the same by just constituting the Technical
Institutions Fee regulatory committee on paper without making it to function
thus enabling such institutions to demand and collect fee for technical courses
without any regulation.
20. Therefore, a direction is issued to the State Government to
forthwith constitute the Technical Institutions Fee regulatory committee as
directed in the above Supreme Court judgment in Islamic Academy of
Education (supra), fix the remuneration and other conditions of service to it’s
Chairman and members such as leave etc., provide staff and infrastructure to
the said committee, and thus make it functional so that the said judgment of
the Supreme Court is implemented in letter and spirit.
This exercise shall be completed within one month from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order by the respondents.

TRHC010005832026
Page 9 of 9 2026:THC:1209-DB

21. Writ Appeal is disposed of with above directions.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.






(BISWAJIT PALIT, J) (M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ)



























Pulak
PULAK BANIK
Digitally signed by PULAK BANIK
Date: 2026.09.07 17:27:28 +05'30'