Inside Delhi’s new Fee Regulation Bill

New Delhi: The Delhi government has introduced a fresh legislative effort aimed at regulating fees in private schools, but the move has sparked sharp criticism from parent associations, educators, and political opposition. The Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025, was tabled in the Assembly on Monday, with Education minister Ashish Sood calling it a “historic intervention” in favour of parents. However, concerns have surfaced over key provisions that critics claim could empower schools instead of holding them accountable.

What the Bill proposes

The bill aims to create a uniform regulatory framework for all private, unaided, and recognised schools in the capital, including minority institutions and those not situated on government-allotted land. A central objective of the bill is to curb arbitrary fee hikes by introducing a structured approval process.

Under the proposed law, every school will be required to establish a School-Level Fee Regulation Committee at the start of each academic year. This committee will be composed of five parents selected randomly from the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA), with a mandate to include at least two women and one member from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, or other socially and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. In addition, the committee will feature a representative from the Directorate of Education (DoE), while the chairperson will be appointed from the school management itself. The schools must submit proposed fees and supporting documents by July 31, with the committee required to decide within 30 days. Once approved, the fee structure will remain valid for three years. The bill also makes it mandatory to display approved fees on school premises and websites.

Clause allowing annual fee hike up to 15%

A major point of contention is the clause that allows schools to increase fees by up to 15 per cent annually with committee approval, without needing prior consent from higher authorities. Government officials argue this provision introduces predictability and limits excessive hikes. However, parent associations say this is a “built-in loophole” that legalises annual increases under the garb of regulation.

Grievance mechanism under scrutiny

To contest a fee decision, parents must form an “Aggrieved Parents Group” representing at least 15 per cent of the school’s parent body. The group can appeal to a District Fee Appellate Committee, and eventually to a state-level Revision Committee. Critics have labelled the 15 per cent threshold as unfair and impractical. “Expecting hundreds of parents to mobilise together just to raise a concern is an impossible task. This clause silences dissent before it even begins,” said a member of All India Parents Association.

Lack of mandatory audits raises red flags

Another glaring issue is the absence of mandatory audits in the bill. Previously, under the Delhi School Education Act and Rules (DSEAR), financial audits were crucial to ensure transparency. “The word ‘audit’ doesn’t appear in the entire document. How can the government promise accountability without mandating financial scrutiny?” asked Shikha Bhagga, an education rights lawyer.

Legalising 2025-26 fee hikes?

The bill allows schools to charge the proposed fees for the 2025–26 academic year starting April 1, 2025. Parents say many schools already hiked fees this year without approval, and the bill’s language legitimises these unauthorised hikes retroactively. “This bill is being used to rubber-stamp what was done illegally. Instead of protecting parents, it shields schools,” Bhagga added.

Penalties and provisions

The bill outlines penalties between Rs 1 lakh and Rs 10 lakh for violations. It allows the government to seize school assets in extreme cases of non-compliance. But critics say without meaningful parental oversight or financial transparency, such clauses will remain on paper. While the government projects the bill as a reformative step to ensure transparency in school fee structures, experts warn that without

key safeguards like mandatory audits, parent-elected representation, and stronger grievance mechanisms, it risks becoming a procedural formality rather than a real check on profiteering in private education.