Colleges Cannot Withhold Student Certificates for Fee Recovery: Andhra Pradesh HC

Educational institutions have no lien over a student's original academic certificates, as withholding such documents violates the right to livelihood and education under the Constitution of India, 1950. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has delivered a sharp rebuke to private colleges using students' personal records as leverage for fee collection, ruling that such coercive practices are strictly prohibited under national regulatory guidelines.

In a case involving an aspiring BDS student, the single-judge bench of Justice Harinath.N held that academic certificates are the property of the student and their retention by an institution under any pretext is illegal and arbitrary. The Court emphasized that even if a college has a legitimate claim for tuition fees, it must seek recovery through other legal means rather than stalling a student's future.

The Prohibition on Retaining Original Certificates

The Court examined the 2018 notification issued by the University Grants Commission, which was framed under Section 12(d) and Section 12(j) of the UGC Act 1956. This notification was specifically designed to curb malpractices related to fee refunds and the retention of certificates. The Court noted that the guidelines mandate institutions to physically verify originals at the time of admission and return them immediately, keeping only self-attested copies.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "Under no circumstances can the first respondent justify retaining the petitioner's academic certificates and demanding payment of the entire course fee as a condition for returning the petitioner's original academic certificates. Original academic certificates are the property of the student. They are the foundation of the student's right to pursue higher education, enrol with professional bodies and seek employment, and thus bear directly on the right to livelihood and education under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950. An institution has no lien over them."

Furthermore, the Court clarified that even if a student voluntarily drops out, the institution's remedy for fee recovery lies elsewhere. The bench stated: "Even if the College has a legitimate claim for the Tuition Fee or any other fee, withholding of certificates is not permissible as a mode of recovery. The remedy of the first respondent lies elsewhere but certainly not in the form and manner adopted by the first respondent."

Directions Issued by the Court

The Court has following directions:

"...the writ petition deserves to be allowed, with a direction to the respondents to return the petitioner's original academic certificates within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the order."

Background

The petitioner had secured a BDS seat at the SIBAR Institute of Dental Sciences through NEET 2019 counseling. She submitted her original SSC marks list, Intermediate memorandum, and other certificates at the time of joining in September 2019. However, due to medical complications in her leg following an operation, she could not join the course and requested the return of her certificates.

The college refused to return the documents, demanding the payment of the entire course fee amounting to over ₹21 Lakhs, citing that as a private unaided institution, they were entitled to the fee for the whole course when a student drops out. The college relied on GOMS No. 72 dated 15.07.2019 regarding discontinuation fees. The petitioner approached the High Court through a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, challenging the retention as illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19, and Article 21.

Case Details:
Case No.: WRIT PETITION NO: 15274/2020
Neutral Citation: 2026:APHC:46012
Case Title: Anisha Busa V. Sibar Institute Of Dental Sciences And Anr
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): M SOLOMON RAJU
For the Respondent(s): Bommanaboyena Srinivasa Rao, T.V.Sridevi (SC FOR Dr NTR Health U)

Source: 2026 CaseBase(AP) 19874