Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/16/459

Taljinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

IkDP education India Pvt.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

H.S.Grewal ADv.

30 Oct 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

Consumer Complaint No. : 459 of 15.06.2016

   Date of Decision            :  30.10.2017

Taljinder Singh son of Shri Manjit Singh, resident of 178-A, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana.

….. Complainant

                                                            Versus       

 

1.I.D.P. Education India Private Limited, 6^th Floor, Plot No.32, Global Business Square, Sector 44, Gurgaon-122003 Haryana through its Managing Director.

2.I.D.P.Education India Private Limited, SCO 41, 2^nd Floor, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana-141001 through the Manager.

3.I.D.P.Eduation India Private Limited, SCF-3, Sarabha Nagar Market, Ludhiana through the Manager.

…Opposite parties

 

          (Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

QUORUM:

SH.G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

SH.PARAM JIT SINGH BEWLI, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

 

For complainant               :         Sh.Ajay Chawla, Advocate

For Ops                           :         Sh.H.R.Sharma, Advocate

 

PER G.K DHIR, PRESIDENT

 

1.                           Complainant holds passport No.J7384444, in which, his date of birth mentioned as 10.3.1993. After completing Graduation, complainant evinced interest to pursue further studies in Canada and that is why, he was to clear IELTS exam with good score. So, complainant deposited examination fees of Rs.10,750/- in ICICI Bank Limited in account of Ops for appearing in the examination. Thereafter, complainant was issued admit card by Ops, which was received by him on email address. Examination date of speaking test was scheduled for 3.3.2016 at Gulmor Hotel, Ludhiana, but for tests of listening, writing and reading, the scheduled date was 5.3.2016 at same venue. Complainant appeared in the said examination and thereafter, result was to be declared on 18.3.2016. Result of the complainant was not declared by Ops for the reason best known to them. Complainant had to apply for Canada in May 2016 for intake session, but due to lapse of Ops in not declaring the result in time, complainant failed to intake session admission in July 2016. Complainant was able to get admission in intake session of Canada in September 2016 only. Life of complainant alleged to be spoiled and that is why he served legal notice dated 26.5.2016 through counsel. By pleading deficiency in service on the part of Ops, it is claimed that complainant has suffered physical stress, strain and agony. Prayer made for directing Ops to declare the result of the complainant immediately. Even compensation for mental harassment and agony of Rs.15 lac, but litigation expenses of Rs.33,000/- more claimed.

2.                 Ops filed their joint written reply by pleading interalia as if complaint is not maintainable against educational institution in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the cases cited in the para no.1 under head “preliminary objections” in the written statement. Admittedly, complainant deposited fee for appearing in IELTS exam. It is claimed that result of IELTS test is declared after proper verification and scrutiny by the experts, so as to protect the integrity and the sanctity of the test results. Every endeavor is made to declare the results of the tests of IELTS candidates in time, but no fixed schedule is there in this respect. Complainant failed to discharge his onus of proving as to where from he gathered the information that result of IELTS test was to be declared on 18.3.2016. The booklet/prospectus of the IELTS test result alleged to be annexed with the reply. There was no lapse on the part of Ops in declaring the IELTS test result of the complainant and as such, allegation regarding sufferance of mental harassment or agony or of sufferance on account of loss of admission denied one by one each. It is claimed that complaint has been filed by leveling baseless and false allegations. Complainant has not applied for getting admission in any overseas institute in Canada. Other averments of the complaint also denied.

3.                 Complainant to prove his case tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CA along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13 and then closed the evidence.

4.                 On the other hand, counsel for Ops tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.OP/A of Sh.Jaswinder Singh along with document Ex.OP1 and then counsel for Ops closed the evidence.

5.                 Written arguments not submitted by any of the parties. Oral arguments by counsel for parties addressed and those were heard. Records gone through minutely. 

6.                 Undisputedly, complainant deposited fees for appearing in IELTS test and the same even borne from the contents of Ex.C2.  Perusal of Ex.C2          reveals that complainant deposited Rs.10,750/- as test fee on 2.1.2016. Test date is mentioned as 5.3.2016 in Ex.C2, but the same mentioned as 5.3.2016 and 3.3.2016 in Ex.C3. Result was declared on 13.6.2016 as per produced document Ex.C4 and as such, it is vehemently contended by counsel for complainant that in view of the inordinate delay in IELTS test Results, being not declared within 13 days, complainant had to suffer. No document produced by the complainant to show that as per rules and regulations or as per the undertaking given by Ops, the result was to be declared within 13 days of the conduct of the test. If that be the position, then submission advanced by counsel for complainant has no force that there was inordinate delay of about three months in declaring the results.

7.                 Ex.C9 and Ex.C11 are the documents produced on record to show that result of Manisha and Nisha was declared on 8.7.2016 after their appearance in IELTS test on 25.6.2016. Certainly in Ex.C13, it is mentioned that IELTS results are released in 13 calendar days after test. Even if in this advertisement Ex.C13, mention made regarding release of results in 13 calendar days, despite that sanctity of the result has to be maintained and as such, Ops could not be denied right of due verification before declaration of the result.

 

8.                 Conditions no.13 and 14 of declaration annexed with application form Ex.OP1 reads as under:-

“13.I understand that the IELTS Test Partners have a responsibility to all candidates and Recognising Organisations to ensure the highest confidence in the accuracy and integrity of test results and that the IELTS Test Partners therefore reserve the right to withhold test results temporarily or permanently, or to cancel the test results which have been issued, if they consider those results to be unreliable for reasons of suspected malpractice or any other irregularity in the test process.

14.I understand that my result may not be issued 13 days after the test if any of the IELTS Test Partners deem it necessary to review any matter associated with my test or the administration of my test, including making enquiries as to whether any rules or regulations have been breached. I understand that I may be required to provide additional samples of my writing and speaking for the purposes of assisting any investigation before or after the test. I understand that in exceptional circumstances, I may be required to re-take one or more IELTS components.”

9.                 Perusal of these clauses as such reveals that right of withholding of test results temporarily or permanently is with the IELTS Test Partners, so as to ensure the highest confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the results. It is specified in condition no.14 of the declaration itself that result may not be issued  in 13 days of conduct of test, if any IELTS Test Partners deem it necessary to review any matter associated with the test or the administration of the test. In view of these conditions no.13 and 14 of declaration Ex.OP1, it is made out that it is not pre-requisite of declaring result within 13 days. Rather, right of withholding the result available to the IELTS Test Partners for ensuring the highest confidence in accuracy and integrity of the test results and as such, if result of the complainant delayed, then no fault on the part of Ops can be found.

10.               Otherwise also, this Forum has no jurisdiction because as per law laid down in case titled as IDP Education India Pvt. Ltd vs. Gaganpreet Singh bearing First Appeal No.59 of 2017 decided on 11.7.2017 by Ist.Addl.Bench of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, educational institutions do  not provide any kind of services and as such, in matter of admission, fees etc, there cannot be a question of deficiency in service. It has been held in this case that education is not a commodity as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court of Country in cases titled as Maharishi Dayanand University vs. Surjeet Kaur-2010(2)CPC-696(S.C.) and P.T.Koshy & another vs. Ellen Charitable Trust & others-2012(3)CPC-615. So, a student is neither a consumer and nor the educational institutions rendering any  services and             as such, consumer complaint is not maintainable as per ratio of this case. Ratio of this case is fully applicable to the facts of the present case, particularly when

questions involved in this cited case were the same qua delay in declaration of IELTS test results as are the questions involved in this case before us. So, this consumer complaint legally also is not maintainable and as such, complainant is at liberty to approach appropriate and competent Forum for seeking redressal of the grievance as per rules.

11.               Therefore, as a sequel of the above discussion, complaint dismissed with observation that complainant is at liberty to approach appropriate and competent Forum for seeking redressal of the grievance as per rules. No order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules.

12.                         File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

 (Param Jit Singh Bewli)                                     (G.K.Dhir)

 Member                                                              President

Announced in Open Forum

Dated:30.10.2017

Gurpreet Sharma.