Haryana

StateCommission

A/526/2014

M C College of Engineering - Complainant(s)

Versus

Gaurav - Opp.Party(s)

Vikash

20 Jan 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      526 of 2014

Date of Institution:     19.06.2014

Date of Decision :      20.01.2016

 

1.      Director, NC College of Engineering Israna, District Panipat (Haryana).

 

2.      Principal, NC College of Engineering Israna, District Panipat (Haryana).

                                      Appellants-Opposite Parties

Versus

 

Gaurav son of Sh. Parhlad Singh, r/o New Friends Colony, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurgaon (Haryana).

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:              Shri Sandeep Kumar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ajay Ghangas, Advocate for appellants.

                             Respondent ex parte.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

This appeal has been preferred by Director, NC College of Engineering and another-opposite parties against the order dated  May 22^nd, 2014 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short ‘District Forum’), Panipat,  whereby complaint filed by Gaurav-complainant (respondent herein) was accepted.  The appellants were directed to refund Rs.96,150/- after deduction of three months fees or hostel charges alongwith interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization and Rs.2200/- litigation expenses to the complainant.

2.      The complainant got admission in the institute of the appellants in B.Tech Civil.  He deposited Rs.96,150/- with the appellants. After a few days, the complainant got admission in some other institute. He requested the appellants to cancel his admission and asked for the refund of the fee but the appellants refused.

3.      He filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘the Act’) which was allowed vide impugned order by issuing direction to the appellants as mentioned in paragraph No.1 of this order.

4.      The dispute is between the complainant and the Educational Institute. So, the issue before this Commission is as to whether or not the question of deficiency in service arises?

5.      Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bihar School Examination Board versus Suresh Prasad Sinha, IV (2009) C.P.J. 34 (SC) held that the examination fee paid by student is not a consideration for availment of service, but charge paid for privilege of participation in examination. It has also been held that Education Boards & Universities are not ‘Service Provider’ and the complaints against them are not maintainable under the Act.

6.      In P.T. Koshy & Anr. Versus Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors., 2012(3) C.P.C. 615 (S.C.) Hon’ble Apex Court after referring to judgment Maharshi Dayanand University v. Surjeet Kaur 2010(11) SCC 159 held that education is not commodity and Educational institutions are not providing any service. Therefore, in the matter of admission, fee etcetera, there cannot be a question of deficiency in service. Such matters cannot be entertained by the Consumer Fora under the Act.

7.      In view of the legal position enunciated above, the complaint was not maintainable before the District Forum.  

8.      Hence, this appeal is accepted, impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed. However, the complainant shall have liberty to seek his grievances before the proper forum or Civil Court, as per law.  He can seek help for condonation of delay in accordance with law laid down in Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute – 1995(3) SCC 583.

9.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 20.01.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK