MS. NIPUR CHANDNA (MEMBER)

ORDER

02.05.2024

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging the deficiency in service on the part of OP. The brief facts of the complaint are that complainant took admission in B.Tech Geo-Informetics Program for academic session 2022-2023 with OP University and paid a total sum of Rs. 2,06,000/-.
2. On 11.02.2022, due to financial crisis arose in the family during COVID period complainant requested for withdrawal of her admission as well as refund of the fee deposited by her to OP. The complainant moved an application before OP for withdrawal of the admission as well as for refund of the money, the same was duly acknowledged by OP. It is further alleged by the complainant that on various occasions she approached OP for refund but all in vain. She even wrote various emails to OP but OP neither responded to the same nor had refunded the money till date. The complainant has also brought to the notice of OP notification dated 02.08.2022 and 01.11.2022 of University Grants Commission whereby directions were given to the Universities that if the student withdraw her admission till 31.10.2022 for academic year  2022-2023 then the whole fees shall be refunded to the students without any deduction charges. It is alleged by the complainant that despite issuance of the circular dated 02.08.2022 and 01.11.2022 OP failed to refund the deposit amount. This act of OP is squarely covered under the definition of deficiency in service, hence, this complaint.

3. The present complaint case is on admission stage. We have heard the arguments advance at the bar by Ld. Counsel for complainant Ms. Nistha Ahuja and have perused the record.

4. Admittedly, the education is not a commodity, neither education institutions providing any kind of service, hence, the questions of deficiency in service does not arose and such a complaints are not maintainable before Consumer Court (Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as P.T. Koshy & Anr. Vs. Ellen Charitable Trust, SLP(Civil) No. 22532/2012, vide judgment dated 09.08.2012, “ Maharishi Dayanand University Vs. Surjeet Kaur, P.T. Koshy Vs. Ellen Charitable Trust, Manu Solanki Vs. Vinayaka Mission University and Shivam Malhotra Vs. M.D. Oxl School of Multi-media ). The judgment relied upon by the complainant is distinguishable one.

5. Now coming to the fact of the present complaint case, the complainant took admission with OP University in B.Tech Geo-Informetics Program for academic session 2022-2023 and paid a total sum of Rs. 2,06,000/- on 11.02.2022 she requested OP University to refund the entire fee deposited by her, but the OP does not refunded the money . Admittedly, in the present complaint case complainant had not hired the services of OP as  education is not a commodity and neither education institutions providing any kind of service, hence, the present dispute is not a consumer dispute and in view of the judgment cited above we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is not a consumer, hence, present complaint is not maintainable, therefore dismissed with liberty to the complainant to approach appropriate court as per law.

6. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving the application from the parties in the registry. Order be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on   02.05.2024.

Sanjay Kumar             Nipur Chandna                     Rajesh

               President                            Member                         Member