Hon’ble Mr. Ajeya Matilal, Presiding Member

          Ld. Advocate for the appellant is present. None appears for the respondent.

          So, heard the Ld. Advocate for the appellant in full.

          Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with judgment  dt. 23.09.2019 passed by Ld. DCDRC, South 24 Parganas in CC case no. 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 39 dismissing the case on contest, the appellant / opposite party preferred this appeal.

          In the ordering portion of the impugned judgment the Commission below observed: “That the complaint cases be and the same are decreed on contest against the O.P. with a cost of Rs. 5000/- in each of the cases.

          The O.P. is directed to refund Rs. 10,000/- to the complainants in each of the cases except C.C. no. 39 of 2019, wherein the OP will have to pay Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant, and a sum of Rs. 5000/- as compensation within a month of this order, failing which, the compensation amount, cost amount and the caution money will bear interest @ 10% p.a. till full realisation thereof.

          Registrar-in-Charge of this Forum is directed to send a copy of the judgment free of cost at once to the parties concerned by speed post.”

          The fact of the cases is in short was like that the complainants got themselves admitted to the OP College in different courses of Engineering and during admission they paid admission fee along with caution money to the Institute. The complainants completed their courses and submitted their application to the OP College with a prayer for refund of caution money. But the OP did not pay the same.  So, the complainants filed the instant case praying for refund of caution money to them and payment of compensation.

          In W.V the OP stated that the education is not a commodity and therefore the instant cases were not maintainable.

          Our attention was drawn to the AICTE Refund Policy which runs as follows:

          “In the event of a student / candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course, the entire fee collected from the student after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) shall be refunded / returned by the Institution. It would not be permissible for Institutions to retain the School / Institution Leaving Certificates in original. If a student leaves after joining the course and if the vacated seat is consequently filled by another student by the last date of admission, the Institution must refund the fee collected after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) and proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where applicable. In case the vacated seat is not filed, the Institution should refund the security deposit and return the original documents. Institution should not demand fee for the subsequent years from the students cancelling their admission at any point of time. Fee refund along with the return of Certificates should be completed within 7 days.”

          In view of AICTE Refund Policy the Ld. Commission below allowed the complaint case with a direction for refund of caution money along with compensation.

          Ld. Advocate for the appellant referred to a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Annapurna College of Engineering v. Gulshan Kumar and Anr. wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that : “Educational Institutions are not providing any kind of service, therefore, in matter of admission, fees etc there cannot be a question of deficiency of service. Such matters cannot be entertained by the Consumer Forum under the C.P. Act, 1986.”

          The Ld. Commission below held that there was deficiency in service so it granted relief as prayed for by the complainant.

          It appears that in respect of each of the case the complainants are different persons and they were admitted  in courses which are different.

          The OP/ respondent contested all cases by filing separate W.V. Parties also adduced their evidence separately. So, it is apparent that the cause of action for all the complaint cases are different.

So, we are of the view that deciding all such cases by impugned common judgment is not justified and each complaint should have been dealt with separately by the Commission below.

          In view of the above observation the appeal is allowed and the  impugned judgment is set aside.

          The parties are directed to appear before the Commission below on 16.10.2023.

          Ld. Commission below is directed to dispose of each case separately on the basis of complaint, W.V and evidence on record adduced by the both sides already on record after hearing the parties within 90 days from the date of appearance of the parties without being influenced by any observation made by this Court.

          There shall be no order as to the costs.

          Order of stay, if there is any, in connection with the present appeal stands vacated.