MILIND DILWALIA filed a consumer case on 07 Jul 2023 against AMBEDKAR DSEU SHAKARPUR CAMPUS in the North East Consumer Court. The case no is CC/162/2023 and the judgment uploaded on 12 Jul 2023.
Delhi
North East
CC/162/2023
MILIND DILWALIA - Complainant(s)
Versus
AMBEDKAR DSEU SHAKARPUR CAMPUS - Opp.Party(s)
07 Jul 2023
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST
The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the Opposite Parties i.e. Vice chancellor of Delhi Skill & Entrepreneurship University (Opposite Party No.1) and Ambedkar Delhi Skill &Entrepreneurship University,Shakarpur Campus, New delhi (Opposite Party No. 2). As per the complaint, the Opposite Party No.1 is the Vice chancellor, overall responsible for academic and administrative functioning in the Opposite Party No.2 university while Opposite Party No.2 is state university in Delhi, offering graduate, post graduate and diploma courses in various fields. The case of the Complainant is that upon enrolling in the course of Bachelor of Computer Applications, he encountered several issues regarding the administration, facilities and educational standards in the Opposite Party University which allegedly amounted to deficiency in services and unfair trade practices on the part of Opposite Party. Hence, it is prayed by the Complainant that Opposite Party be directed to pay refund the price of service with interest as well as the compensation and litigation charges.
Arguments heard on admission. Perused the file.
From the perusal of the material on record, we find that the preliminary issue for determination of maintainability of the present complaint is as to Whether educational institutions providing education and other incidental activities to the students come within the purview of the Consumer protection Act, 2019 and whether the Complainant, being student, is the ‘consumer’ under the Act.
These issues have been dealt with in detail by Hon'ble Supreme Court in MaharshiDayanand University VsSurjeetKaur (2010)11 SCC 159 wherein it is held that the education is not a commodity and the educational institutions are not service providers. Therefore, the students are not consumers.
The above mentioned judgment was followed byHon'ble Supreme Court in P.T. Koshy&Anr. Vs Ellen Charitable Trust and Ors. in SLP (c) No. 22532 of 2012.
Relying upon the above decisions by Hon’ble Supreme Court, the larger bench of Hon'ble National Commission in its judgment dated 20.01.2020 titled Manu SolankiVsVinayaka Mission University in CC No. 261/2012 held that Educational matters do not come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and, therefore, the Complaint is not maintainable.
In view of above settled position of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court and followed by Hon'ble National Commission in plethora of judgments, we are of the considered opinion that Opposite Parties, being educational institute are not service providers and the Complainant is not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. In view thereof, this Commissiondoes not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint of aforesaid nature as the present complaint is not maintainable. Hence, the complaint is dismissed accordingly, with liberty to the Complainant to approach the appropriate Forum / Court in accordance with law.
Order announced on 07.07.23.
Copy of this order be given to the Complainant free of cost.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Anil Kumar Bamba)
Member
(Adarsh Nain)
Member
(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
President
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.