Eligible Scheduled Caste students cannot be denied scholarship applications due to unresolved institutional fee fixation.

The petitioners, Scheduled Caste students, qualified in the Diploma in Animal Husbandry and Dairy Technology entrance examination conducted by the Professional Examination Board and were allotted seats through online counselling conducted by respondent No. 6-University in respondent No. 8’s private institution.

After admission, the petitioners attempted to submit online applications for post-matric scholarships through the MPTAAS portal, but the portal did not permit submission on the ground that the institution’s fees had not been fixed by the AFRC.

The petitioners submitted a representation to the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Gwalior, but received no effective relief.

They therefore invoked Article 226 of the Constitution seeking directions to open the MPTAAS portal and permit submission of their scholarship applications for the academic sessions 2023–24 and 2024–25, along with reimbursement of scholarship fees.

Whether the respondents could prevent the petitioners from submitting their post-matric scholarship applications merely because the AFRC had not fixed the fees of respondent No. 8’s institution.

Whether the respondents should be directed to open the MPTAAS portal to enable the petitioners to submit their scholarship applications for the relevant academic sessions.

Whether the petitioners were entitled, at this stage, to a direction for reimbursement of the scholarship amount claimed by them.

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to address administrative inaction affecting the petitioners’ access to a State-administered post-matric scholarship scheme.

It applied the principle that eligible Scheduled Caste students should not be deprived of the opportunity to apply for scholarship due to circumstances attributable to the educational institution or the fee-regulatory authorities, rather than to the students themselves.

The Court relied on the coordinate Bench decision in Neer Ahirwar and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, W.P. No. 12142 of 2023, where the State had opened the scholarship portal for earlier academic years, and referred to Shakti Singh Rawat and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, W.P. No. 13550 of 2023, decided on 28 August 2023.

The Court further proceeded on the basis that the course was regulated by the State Government and that the University had already fixed the course fees; consequently, non-fixation of fees by the AFRC could not prevent submission of the students’ applications.

The Court found that the petitioners’ inability to submit their applications resulted from the MPTAAS portal’s technical and administrative condition concerning AFRC fee fixation, and not from any ineligibility or default on their part.

The earlier decision in Neer Ahirwar demonstrated that the State had previously enabled students to apply for scholarships notwithstanding similar circumstances.

On the material before it, the Court accepted the petitioners’ submission that the course was State-regulated and that the University had already prescribed the fees, leaving no justification for denying them access to the scholarship application process merely because the AFRC had not separately fixed the institution’s fees.

Accordingly, the Court directed that the portal be opened so that the petitioners could submit their applications, while leaving the ultimate processing and determination of the scholarship claims to be undertaken in accordance with law.

The respondents were directed to open the MPTAAS portal and enable the petitioners to submit their post-matric scholarship applications within one month from communication of the order, with the applications to be processed in accordance with law.

The Court did not grant an unconditional direction for immediate reimbursement; the petitioners’ scholarship entitlement was left to be considered through the lawful processing of their applications.