DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

Case No.90 of 2015

Sh. Anil Sherry

R/o Khasra No. 08/24, I-Block,

Street No.4, Swaroop Nagar,

Delhi-110042                                                       ….Complainant

Versus

Vice- Chancellor of IGNOU

Maidan Garhi, New Delhi-110068                        ……Opposite Party

                                                          Date of Institution          : 08.04.15                                                            Date of Order        : 12.05.16

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

Sh. S. S. Fonia, Member

O R D E R

Succinctly speaking, the case of the Complainant is that he is doing MA in Psychology from university of OP. He states to have appeared in practical examination in the month of July, 2013 and his marks sheet are said to have been received by the Evaluation Department of OP in August, 2013 but he alleges that his result has not been declared. Feeling aggrieved with the conduct of OP he has filed the present complaint before this Forum praying this Forum to issue directions against the OP to give marks sheet, announce results and compensation be granted to him.

OP in the written statement has inter-alia stated that their University is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable.

     Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence.

During the hearing on 08.04.16, the counsel for OP argued that OP is not an educational institution and the Complainant is not a  ‘Consumer’ as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Accordingly, the Complainant was asked to take this fact into consideration. However, the Complainant stated that the Forum may pass any order in this regard.

Now we straightaway come to the question whether the complaint is maintainable or not?

Admittedly, the Complainant has sought orders from this Forum to pass order for issuing mark sheet and declare the result.  

We are reminded of the decision of the Apex Court [Bihar School Examination Board vs. Suresh Prasad Sinha (2009) 8 SCC 483] wherein it was held that the students cannot be treated as consumers  for the purpose of examination/evaluation of answers scripts or furnishing of mark sheet etc. by single statutory authority for non commercial function. Since the OP is a University performing non commercial function for the aforesaid purpose, the complaint does not lie. Complainant is not a Consumer. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

(S. S. Fonia)                                                                        (Naina Bakshi)                                                                               (N. K. Goel)

Member                                                                                     Member                                                                                     President

Announced on 12.05.16.