M.A. No. 24/2010 The present application has been filed by the Petitioner seeking disposal of the Revision Petition in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Bihar School Examination Board Vs. Suresh Prasad Sinha 2009(12) SCALE 228. In the present case the dispute was regarding the conduct of the examination. In the aforesaid case the Supreme Court has held that negligence of omission or deficiency in conduct of an examination does not convert the Board into a service provider for a consideration, nor convert the examinee into a consumer who can make complaint under the Act. Para 11 of the Order reads as under:- “The object of the Act is to cover in its net, services offered or rendered for a consideration. Any service rendered for a consideration is presumed to be a commercial activity in its broadest sence(including professional activity or quasi-commercial activity). But the Act does not intended to cover discharge of a statutory function of examining whether a candidate is fit to be declared as having successfully completed a course by passing the examination. The fact that in the course of conduct of the examination, or evaluation of answer-scripts, or furnishing of mark-sheets or certificates, there may be some negligence, omission or deficiency, does not convert the Board into a service-provider for a consideration, nor convert the examinee into a consumer who make a complaint under the Act. We are clearly of the view that the Board is not a ‘service provider’ and a student who takes an examination is not a ‘consumer’ and consequently, complaint under the Act will not be maintainable against the Board.” Notice of this application was issued to the Respondents. Shri Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. has put appearance on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. Notice sent to Complainant/Respondent No. 1 has been received back duly served. Nobody is present on behalf of R-1. Proceeded ex-parte. As the point in issue is clearly concluded by the aforesaid Judgement of the Supreme Court, we allow this Revision Petition and set aside the orders of the fora below and dismissed the complaint filed by R-1 with no orders as to costs. The Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly.