Order No. 3 Date: 15-02-2016

          Complainant takes no step. Today is fixed for further admission hearing of the case. None appears from the side of the complainant on repeated calls; nor does the complainant appears to plead his case personally.

          Seen the petition of complaint. It appears that the petition of complaint dwells over the allegation of reduction of salary to the tune of Rs.18000/- from the salary of the complainant, who happens to be an Assistant Teacher of Debhog S.C. Milan Vidyapith. A teacher is not a consumer; so also a student. Education has been kept outside the purview of the Consumer Protection Act (decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Maharshi Dayanand University Vs. Surjeet Kaur in Civil Appeal No. 6807/2008 relied upon). In appreciation of the fact that an educational institution does not render any service, we are of the view that the complainant does not qualify as a ‘consumer’ as defined u/s 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

        We are, therefore, not inclined to admit the petition of complaint and the same is, accordingly, not entertained being not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.