Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/103/2021

Yadvinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Nancy College of Education - Opp.Party(s)

complainant in person

11 Apr 2022

ORDER

CC/103/2021      Yadvinder Singh    Vs    Nancy College of Education and Ors.

Present: Sh. Vishal Sharma Adv., counsel for the complainant, assisted by

              Sh. H.S.Sakroli         

              None for OPs.

 

1.                 Heard. The learned counsel for the OPs has pointed out that this Commission has got no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint as the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, and as the OPs are not service provider being an education institute and the complainant being a student is not a consumer. In this regard he has relied upon the pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in case titled as Bihar School Education Board Vs. Suresh Prasad Sinha passed in Civil Appeal No.3911 of 2003 decided on 04.09.2009, in which it has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that;

                                       “Education Board conducted examination but did not declare the result of on candidate and candidate had to re-appear in the exam – Complaint before Consumer Forum – Complaint not maintainable – Board is a statutory authority not carrying on any commercial or service oriented activity – Board is not a service provider and candidate is not a consumer.”

         He has also relied upon another pronouncement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in case titled as Maharshi Dayanand University Vs. Surjeet Kaur passed in Civil Appeal No.6807 of 2008 decided on 19.07.2010 in which it has been held that;

                                            “Respondent as a student is neither a consumer nor is the appellant rendering any service – Rule of estoppel will also not apply against statute”

       He has also relied upon the pronouncement of Hon’ble National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi passed in case titled as Regional Institute of Cooperative Management Sector 32-C, Through its Director, Chandigarh   Vs Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, by way of this order total six revision petitions have been disposed of and it has been observed by Hon’ble National Commission that;

“Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Section 21(b) In number of judgments, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the student nor a consumer – The Educational Institutions are not a service provider – Issue related to admission, fees etc. – Not to be decided and comes within the jurisdiction of the consumer forums/foras – Hence, impugned orders passed by both the foras below cannot be sustained – Liable to be set aside – Liberty granted to respondents to approach before the appropriate Forum or Civil Court, as per law – Revision petition allowed.

2.              On the other hand, the complainant contended that the OPs have cheated the complainant. He is 30% handicapped person. He paid the fees to the OPs/College but the same was not deposited by the OPs in the University, as such his result has not been declared by the University.

3.               We have heard both the parties and gone through the file carefully and also gone through the pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Dehli.

4.               The present complaint has been filed by Yadwinder Singh/complainant who was the student of OP No.1/Nancy College of Education, Samana, District Patiala. He has alleged that in March, 2021 he got admission in Nancy College of Education, Samana in B.Ed. Course and paid Rs.45,000/- as fees but his fees was not forwarded by the OPs to the University and as such his result was not declared by the University. The complainant has alleged that he lost valuable period of his life as such he is entitled for the compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- and also requested to direct the OPs to get declared the result of B.Ed(First Year). The present complaint has been filed by complainant before this Commission and in order to get any relief from this Commission the complainant has to prove himself as a consumer of the OPs and the OPs as the service provider. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has already held in the abovementioned pronouncements passed in Mahashi Dayanand Universtiy case and Bihar School Examination Board case and Hon’ble National Consumer Commission has also held in Regional Institute of Cooperative Management case that the student is not a consumer and the educational institutes are not service provider. Accordingly, this Commission has got no jurisdiction to hear and decide the present complaint.

5.               In view of our above-discussions and under the guidance of pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, we have come to the conclusion that the present complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. As such, the same is hereby dismissed with liberty to approach before the appropriate forum as per law. Free certified copy of this order be supplied to the complainant and OPs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

                       

Member                                      Member                               President/11.04.2022