‘Costing an opportunity’: High Court slams Telangana over colleges holding student certificates as ‘collateral’ for fee reimbursement

The bench questioned the government’s enforcement mechanism and sought to know if the Minorities Welfare Department has received any complaints against defaulting colleges and the action initiated. “What are the steps that are put in place to ensure or to ascertain that institutions are following that circular? Any grievance cell, any toll-free number, or any help desk?” the bench asked.

“Retention of a certificate for a period of six months may cost an opportunity, it cannot be compensated later,” the bench remarked, while stressing that students studying on scholarships due to inability to afford fees are forced to “approach a judicial institution for release of the certificate which is for non-payment of fees” and thereby incurring additional costs and litigation burdens.

The court also observed that a sanction of a certain amount is currently pending with the state Finance Department (respondent No.2). The court gave two weeks to the Finance Department to respond, noting that it has not yet filed a counter-affidavit. The case was adjourned for further hearing to March 3.

‘Prohibit colleges from withholding certificates as collateral’

The PIL filed by Association for Socio Economic Empowerment of the Marginalised (ASEEM) and Students Islamic Organisation (SIO) Telangana in 2025, urged the court to compel authorities to immediately pay out all pending scholarships and tuition fee reimbursements for eligible students, while seeking directions to prohibit colleges from withholding students’ original educational certificates as “collateral” for unpaid fees, and ensure their immediate return. The PIL also sought the establishment of a time-bound, effective system to resolve disputes regarding delayed or unpaid funds for both students and institutions.

The PIL also sought directions for proactive online disclosure of fund distribution and pending claims, sanctioned lists, and Government Orders (GOs) under the Right to Information Act. It also sought directions to the respondents to place on record the system, guidelines, and criteria adopted for the release of scholarship funds to various colleges, and to demonstrate that such release is being done in a transparent, timely, fair, and non-discriminatory manner, without bias, favouritism, or arbitrariness, in each quarter/academic session.