The Rajasthan government faced sharp criticism in the Assembly on Wednesday over the collection of a ₹1,000 “consultation fee” from university students, with the Opposition alleging that nearly ₹223 crore had been raised from about 22.5 lakh students without clear legal backing.
The issue was raised during Question Hour by Congress MLA Manish Yadav, who questioned the legality of the fee collected by certain state universities over the past several years. He accused the government of giving contradictory replies to his starred and unstarred questions on the same matter.
The controversy triggered noisy scenes in the House, with Opposition members demanding a probe and intervention by the Governor. Dissatisfied with the government’s response, Congress legislators stood up from their seats, and Yadav briefly moved towards the Well of the House.
Replying to the charge, Deputy Chief Minister and Higher Education Minister Prem Chand Bairwa said the amount was collected under the head “Vimarsh Shulk” (consultation fee) and was utilised for examination-related work.
He detailed that Raj Rishi Bhartrihari Matsya University collected ₹22.16 crore between 2018-19 and 2024-25, Mohanlal Sukhadia University raised ₹43.16 crore between 2020-21 and 2024-25, and the University of Rajasthan collected ₹156.18 crore between 2017-18 and 2024-25.
Also read: Rajasthan House adjourned 5 times following ruling-oppn uproar
“In total, approximately ₹223 crore was collected from around 22.5 lakh students, and the amount was utilised for examination-related work,” Bairwa said.
Yadav objected to the explanation, asking how the funds could be diverted to examination-related activities when students were already paying separate examination fees. He demanded details on the number of counselling or discussion centres set up, how many students benefited, and under what specific heads the money was spent. He also called for a detailed income and expenditure statement to be tabled in the House.
Leader of Opposition Tika Ram Jully said the minister should cite the relevant provisions of the University Act authorising such a levy, rather than referring to departmental orders. Both Jully and Yadav alleged that there was no explicit provision permitting the collection of the fee from private candidates and sought its immediate discontinuation, along with a refund of the amount already charged.
Yadav described the fee as a “direct burden” on 22.5 lakh students and alleged that neither the government nor the universities had furnished evidence that the ₹223 crore was spent on genuine counselling services.
The debate concluded as Speaker Vasudev Devnani announced the end of Question Hour, with the Opposition insisting that the matter warranted further scrutiny.
Follow us
