RAMKUMAR PATEL Vs. MADHYA PRADESH PASHU CHIKITSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed Pro Bono Publico by an Advocate. The grievance as set forth in the writ petition is that the respondent no.2 by a notification dated 4.7.2011 has increased the fee of the students of 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th years of Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry which is arbitrary and is unjust. By the aforesaid notification, the tuition fee for free seats has been enhanced from Rs.14,000/- to Rs.18,000/-. Similarly, in respect of seat of N.R.I. quota, the fees has been enhanced from 3000 dollars to 3500 dollars.

(2.) The petitioner has alleged that the action of the respondents in enhancing the fees in the mid session is arbitrary and would cause immense financial crises to the students and their parents. In the aforesaid factual background the petitioner has approached this court.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In People s Union for Democratic Rights Vs. Union of India, 1982 3 SCC 235, the Supreme Court whil e dealing with the scope and ambit of public interest litigation has held as follows: "Public Interest litigation is brought before the Court not for the purpose of enforcing the right of one individual against another as happens in the case of ordinary litigation, but it is intended to promote and vindicate public interest which demands that violations of constitutional or legal rights of large numbers of people who are poor, ignorant or in a socially or economically disadvantaged position should not go unnoticed and unredressed".