DEBAJYOTI DEY AND ORS. SHAMIM UL BARI vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — FMA/288/2026

Case under No Act Section NA. Disposed: --PARTLY ALLOWED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Feb-2026

CNR: WBCHCA0070992026

Filing Number

MAT/271/2026

Filing Date

13-Feb-2026

Registration No

FMA/288/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya , Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya , Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

In service Other 177 ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

FIRST MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL (FMA) SECTION

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--PARTLY ALLOWED

Last updated 27-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

No Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEBAJYOTI DEY AND ORS. SHAMIM UL BARI

  2. 2.ABHIK DEY

  3. 3.SANTANU PAL

  4. 4.PRITAM KUMAR DAS

  5. 5.NILANJAN MONDAL

  6. 6.SAYANTAN BHADRA

  7. 7.SNEHA SATPATHI

  8. 8.SHOVAN ROY

  9. 9.SUBHAJIT MONDAL

  10. 10.RAHUL MONDAL

  11. 11.AYON PAUL

  12. 12.SAYANTAN MODAK

  13. 13.SOURIK CHATTERJEE

  14. 14.SUJOYA GHOSH

  15. 15.ASHMIT SARKAR

  16. 16.MARMA BISWAS

  17. 17.JANMEJOY CHAKRABORTY

  18. 18.SUDIP SHOW

  19. 19.RITAM MONDAL

  20. 20.ABHIK DEY

  21. 21.SUPREME DEY

  22. 22.ANANYA CHAKRABORTY

  23. 23.ANIKET BANERJEE

  24. 24.ARPITA KUMAR

  25. 25.ARNAB GHOSH

  26. 26.MANABENDU DAS

  27. 27.ANISH DEBNATH

  28. 28.SUBHADEEP GORAI

  29. 29.MD. EHSAN ANSARI

  30. 30.DEBRAJ PAL

  31. 31.SREYAN SARKAR

  32. 32.BISWAJIT DEY

  33. 33.SANKU GHOSH

  34. 34.SOUVIK SAHA

  35. 35.SUBHIK MONDAL

  36. 36.DITSA GHOSH

  37. 37.TANISHA DAS

  38. 38.REZWANA KHAN CHOWDHURY

  39. 39.ANIKA RAHMAN

  40. 40.SOVAN BANERJEE

  41. 41.RIKTA MAJI

  42. 42.NIKITA TANTI

  43. 43.AYAN MAZUMDAR

  44. 44.NABANITA KUNDU

  45. 45.SOUMYANIL ROY

  46. 46.DEBJEET DAS

  47. 47.PABITRA DARIPA

  48. 48.PRITAM GHOSH

  49. 49.PURBA BANERJEE

  50. 50.INDRAJIT PATHAK

  51. 51.NILANJAN MANDAL

  52. 52.MD. HASNAIN

  53. 53.AMAR MAHATO

  54. 54.SUBHAJIT CHOWDHURY

  55. 55.ANURAG SINGH

  56. 56.ABIR CHAKRABORTY

  57. 57.TUHIN CHAKRABORTY

  58. 58.SURAJIT JANA

  59. 59.RAHUL PODDAR

  60. 60.BIJOY KUMAR ADITYA

  61. 61.SWETAB BARANWAL

  62. 62.JYOTIRMOY GHOSH

  63. 63.SANKHA SUBHRA SINGHAMAHAPATRA

  64. 64.KAIF ALI KHAN

  65. 65.MEGHA KHAN

  66. 66.DEBASIS MAHATA

  67. 67.KRISHAN SARKAR

  68. 68.ABHISHEK KUMAR

  69. 69.ARPIT MISHRA

  70. 70.KAUSHANI KONER

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

  2. 2.THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

  3. 3.THE SECRETARY (TECHNICAL EDUCATION)

  4. 4.THE DEPUTY SECY., DEPT. OF HIGHER EDUATION (T.E.)

  5. 5.ALL INDIA COUNCIL OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

  6. 6.THE CHAIRMAN, ALL INDIA COUNCIL OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

  7. 7.MAULANA ABUL KALAM AZAD UNIVERSITY OF TECHNILOGY

  8. 8.THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAKAUT

  9. 9.THE REGISTRAR, MAKAUT

  10. 10.DR. B.C. ROY ENGG. COLLEGE

  11. 11.THE PRINCIPAL, DR. B.C. ROY ENGG. COLLEGE

  12. 12.THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS, DR. B.C. ROY ENGG. COLLEGE

  13. 13.ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ACADEMIC INSTITUTES

  14. 14.THE PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL ACADEMIC INSTITUTION

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

    Summary The Calcutta High Court allowed three consolidated appeals by engineering and pharmacy students challenging a mid-session fee hike (October 16, 2023) by Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College. The court read down the fee increase notification to apply only prospectively to students admitted after October 16, 2023, not to those who had already completed admission before that date. The college was directed to refund additional amounts collected from already-admitted students or adjust them against future semester fees, protecting students' substantive rights and financial reliance on the original fee structure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya,hon'ble Justice Supratim BhattacharyaView PDF

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Assigned Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya , Hon'ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Assigned Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya , Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Assigned Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya , Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

  9. 25-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty,hon'ble Justice Partha Sarathi ChatterjeeView PDF

  10. 25-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty,hon'ble Justice Partha Sarathi ChatterjeeView PDF

  11. 18-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 13-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. FMA/288/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Calcutta High Court allowed three consolidated appeals by engineering and pharmacy students challenging a mid-session fee hike (October 16, 2023) by Dr. B.C. Roy Engineering College. The court read down the fee increase notification to apply only prospectively to students admitted after October 16, 2023, not to those who had already completed admission before that date. The college was directed to refund additional amounts collected from already-admitted students or adjust them against future semester fees, protecting students' substantive rights and financial reliance on the original fee structure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case