The Uttarakhand state legislature enacted the Uttarakhand Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act in 2006, aiming to regulate fees for unaided private professional institutions affiliated with state-funded universities. Under this Act, an 'Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee' was established, responsible for determining the fee structures for these institutions.

In April 2018, a nodal agency appointed by the state government prescribed a fee structure for several medical colleges, including Shri Guru Ram Rai Institute, setting the fees at ?4 lakhs for State quota seats and ?5 lakhs for All India quota seats. However, the High Court intervened following writ petitions from the college, allowing admissions under the condition that fee collection would be subject to a final ruling.

In March 2019, the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee revised the fees, setting them significantly higher—?13.22 lakhs for the All India quota and ?9.78 lakhs for the State quota for subsequent academic years. The principal of the college appealed, arguing that the committee had not applied the same fee for the 2018-19 academic year. In February 2023, the appellate authority upheld the fee structure and mandated that the same fees apply retroactively to the 2018-2019 academic year.

Following this, students were asked to pay substantial outstanding fees, which led to further legal action. Writ petitions were filed in the High Court seeking relief from the fee demands and a directive to release their undergraduate degrees without requiring additional payments.

The High Court rejected immediate relief but allowed students to pay the revised fees in installments. This arrangement was later modified to allow payments in nine installments, facilitating the issuance of provisional certificates for students to begin their internships.

The students challenged these interim orders in the Supreme Court, which allowed them to continue their internships while further proceedings were ongoing. However, as the case progressed, the High Court scheduled a hearing for March 2025, leaving students in a state of uncertainty.

On hearing the case, the Supreme Court recognized the need for an equitable solution to prevent students from being left in limbo. The Court noted that students had already paid significant amounts toward their fees and could be adversely affected if the dispute remained unresolved for an extended period.

The Supreme Court directed that, upon depositing an additional ?7.50 lakhs, students would be allowed to retrieve their original documents. This provision was contingent upon students undertaking to pay any remaining fees once the court resolved the underlying issues.

This case underscores the challenges in balancing educational institutions' financial needs with students' rights. As the legal proceedings unfold, the Supreme Court's intervention aims to provide temporary relief while the fundamental issues regarding fee fixation and regulatory practices await a final determination. The outcome of this case will have lasting implications for medical education in Uttarakhand, particularly concerning fee structures and student rights.