High Court Upholds West Bengal's Fee Hike at Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College

A Surprise in the Halls of Durgapur\nThe first semester of the 2023‑2027 batch began under a sky that seemed ordinary. On 31 July 2023, a cohort of engineering hopefuls stepped into Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College, Durgapur, clutching their acceptance letters and the prospectus that promised a clear fee schedule. A month later, on 16 September 2023, another group of students joined the same campus, all under the same financial terms. Little did they know that a change was brewing in the corridors of the West Bengal Government.\n\n## The Legal Tightrope of Regulation 7(7)\nRegulation 7(7) of the All India Council for Technical Education Regulations obliges colleges to inform the competent authority of their fee structure in advance. However, it stops short of demanding that the authority finalize its decision before the academic session starts. This nuance became the fulcrum of the dispute when the government issued Notification No. 466‑Edn‑(T)/10M‑04/2004 (Part IV) on 16 October 2023, a date that, according to the notification’s own record, was backdated to that same day in 2023. The notification announced a hike that would raise the development fee to ₹9,075 per semester.\n\n## The Petitioners' Stand: A Promise Broken?\nThe three writ petitions filed in the Calcutta High Court were spearheaded by students who had enrolled before the notification. They argued that the fee structure disclosed at the time of admission should remain in force for the entire four‑year course. Their contention rested on the idea that a sudden increase after the semester had begun would be a breach of the trust implicit in the admission process.\n\n## The College and Government's Argument: Prospectus Rules\nDr. B.C. Roy Engineering College, backed by the West Bengal Government, countered that the prospectus explicitly stated that fees were subject to revision in line with government decisions. They maintained that the notification was a legitimate exercise of the government’s regulatory powers and that the revised fee structure applied retroactively to all students, regardless of their admission date.\n\n## The Court's Division Bench: A Deliberation\nJustice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya sat as a Division Bench to weigh the arguments. They examined the interplay between the All India Council for Technical Education Regulations and the General Clauses Act, 1897. Their analysis focused on whether the notification’s retroactive effect was permissible under the law and whether the students’ contractual expectations could override the government’s authority.\n\n## The Verdict: Notification Holds Water\nOn 24 October 2026, the Calcutta High Court delivered its decision. The bench upheld the West Bengal Government’s notification, affirming that the fee structure could indeed be revised after admissions had begun. The court found that Regulation 7(7) did not mandate the authority to finalize its decision before the academic session started, thereby allowing the government to implement the hike. The ruling also reinforced the interpretation that the prospectus’s language about fee revision was binding.\n\n## Aftermath: Students, Fees, and the Road Ahead\nThe decision sent ripples through the engineering community. Students who had budgeted for the original fee now faced an additional ₹9,075 per semester. The college’s stance remained neutral, focusing on compliance with the court’s ruling. The West Bengal Government, while supportive of its regulatory framework, acknowledged the financial strain on students. The petitioners, critical of the outcome, vowed to monitor future fee adjustments. As the 2023‑2027 batch progresses, the court’s ruling will serve as a precedent for how fee revisions can be applied retroactively in Indian technical education.