The Bombay High Court has reaffirmed that the right to education includes the right to secure and stable accommodation for students, particularly when fees have been paid in full. In a rare intervention on hostel eviction, the Court ordered immediate reinstatement of law students removed overnight, emphasizing that even institutional rules cannot override fundamental principles of natural justice.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, enrolled in the LL.M. Second Year program at the University of Mumbai for the academic year 2023-2025, were admitted to J.S. Hall Boys Hostel in Churchgate, Mumbai, after fulfilling all formalities and paying hostel fees. On 9th/18th September 2025, they paid the full annual hostel fee for the 2025-2026 academic year, as evidenced by Exhibit-I. Despite this, the Warden issued a notice on 30 December 2025 directing them to vacate within four days, citing completion of the 2023-2025 academic cycle.
Procedural History
- September 2025: Petitioners paid full-year hostel fees
- 30 December 2025: Warden issued eviction notice based on academic cycle completion
- 7 January 2026: Petitioners responded requesting continuation until academic session end
- 21 January 2026: Petitioners forcibly evicted overnight; locks broken, belongings confiscated
- 22 January 2026: Writ Petition filed before Bombay High Court
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought immediate reinstatement in their hostel rooms, restoration of their belongings, and a direction to the Warden to consider their request for continued stay until the official end of the academic session.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether a university hostel authority may evict students who have paid fees for the entire academic year, without providing notice, hearing, or consideration of their request for continued stay, and whether such action violates the right to education under Article 21A and principles of natural justice.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
Counsel argued that payment of full-year fees created a legitimate expectation of continued stay until the academic session concluded. The overnight eviction, with forced entry and confiscation of personal belongings, amounted to a violation of procedural fairness and dignity under Article 21. Reliance was placed on Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, which held that the right to education is integral to human dignity.
For the Respondent
The Advocate General and counsel for the Warden conceded that the notice was issued in accordance with hostel rules but did not contest the lack of response to the petitioners’ 7 January 2026 letter. No legal justification was offered for the abrupt, forceful eviction without opportunity to be heard.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the nature of the relationship between the student and the hostel authority, noting that the payment of fees for the full academic year established a contractual and quasi-legal entitlement. The Court observed that while hostel rules may prescribe timelines for vacating premises, they cannot override the basic tenets of natural justice, particularly when a student has acted in good faith.
"The Petitioners had paid for the entire year and sought only to remain until the official end of the academic session. To evict them overnight, break locks, and remove belongings without even considering their written request, is not merely harsh - it is arbitrary and violative of the principles of fairness."
The Court distinguished this from routine hostel turnover, emphasizing that the petitioners were not defaulters, nor had they overstayed beyond their course. The abrupt action, taken without any inquiry into their request, rendered the process fundamentally unfair. The Court further noted that the right to education encompasses not just classroom access but also the conditions necessary for its effective exercise, including safe and uninterrupted accommodation.
The Verdict
The petitioners won. The Court held that eviction without notice or consideration of a student’s request, after full payment of fees, violates natural justice and the right to education. The petitioners were immediately reinstated in their hostel rooms, subject to further orders.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Procedural Compliance Is Non-Negotiable
- Universities and hostel authorities must provide written notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard before eviction, even under internal rules
- Overnight evictions with forced entry are per se unlawful and may attract liability for trespass and damage
- Payment of fees for the full term creates a legitimate expectation that cannot be disregarded summarily
Right to Education Includes Residential Security
- The right to education under Article 21A extends to the physical and psychological conditions necessary for learning
- Hostel accommodation, when provided as part of the educational ecosystem, is not a privilege but a component of educational access
- Institutions must ensure that administrative actions do not undermine student welfare or dignity
Documentation Trumps Discretion
- Fee receipts and written communications serve as binding evidence of entitlement
- Oral assertions or unilaterally applied rules cannot override documented payment and requests
- Institutions must maintain transparent records and respond in writing to student grievances
