This is a complaint made by Shreyosi Mukherjee residing at 2, Panditia Terrace, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700029 against Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Centre Limited (Peerless Coillege of Nursing), 360, Panchasayar, Kolkata-700094 praying for refund of Rs.38,000/- with interest for 2 years and another Rs.1,00,000/- for mental harassment of the Complainant and her family.

            Facts, in brief, are that on the basis of West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination Board Shreyosi Mukherjee got rank of 574 for B.Sc Nursing and her Roll Number was 66050502. Several round of counseling took place. After third round of counseling she got admitted with the OP on 28/8/2014. She deposited Rs.38,000/- for first semester. Classes started from 1/09/2014 and for about 15 days Complainant attended classes after that she was upgraded and got admitted to Ma Sarada College of Nursing, Ramkrishna Mission Seva Pratisthan. After fifth round of counseling there she deposited Rs.27,000/-.She continued her classes there. She took release from Peerless Nursing Home. In order to get her money back. She wrote an application to Peerless College of Nursing on 13/11/2014 and forwarded it to the Central Selection Committee of Nursing at S.S.K.M. Hospital. She did not receive any reply. Thereafter she made an application to the Principal of the Central Selection Committee. Authority which decided to refund Rs.25,000/- but subsequently it decreased to Rs.20,000/- to which Complainant agreed. But finally they decided not to return the money.

            Against this written version was filed on behalf of OPs. OP has denied the allegation made in the complaint and OP stated that Complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Further it is stated that Peerless College of Nursing is recognized and registered under the Nursing Council of India. Complainant attended the counseling and took admission. She attended classes also. The amount was paid by the Complainant as per rules. So the question does not arise that the money would be returned. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant has filed affidavit-in-chief wherein she has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition. Against this OP has filed questionnaire which has been replied by the OP. Thereafter OP also filed affidavit-in-chief against which Complainant filed questionnaire and OP replied.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to refund or not and whether education is a service as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.

            Ld. Advocate for OP made serious argument challenging the maintainability of this case and referred to certain decisions where it has been held that educational institute is not covered under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act. Further Ld. Advocate submitted that in respect of coaching institute refund can be made. Ld. Advocate referred to a decision reported in 2014(3) CPR 152 (NC) and tried to emphasize that student is not a consumer in respect of Post Graduate Diploma in Management. Further Ld. Advocate submitted that since student is not a consumer, the refund of fee cannot be allowed.

            On the contrary Ld. Advocate for Complainant submitted that there are instance where a educational institute is liable to refund the fee.

            Law is on the side of a student who wants to leave an institute or course midway and is seeking refund of fees. This also means, educational institute should not be charging upfront fees for the entire course and refused refund. In case the student wants it. So taking into account the present scenario it is incumbent that educational institutes must refund the fees received from the student for the whole session.

            In the case of University or educational institute, where entire activity is education, and which is a service to the community and this point was  decided on the basis of decision reported in AIR 1978 Supreme Court  548.

            On perusal of the receipt filed it appears that Complainant paid Rs.38,000/- that means she appears to be entitled for refund at least Rs.28,000/- after deducting administrative expenses.

            In 2003 in the matter of Usmania Islamic Academy Vs State of Karnataka in the Supreme Court, three Judges Bench present Hon’ble Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, Hon’ble Justice V. N. Khare and Hon’ble  Justice S. N. Variyaqva pronounced a detailed order holding educational institute answerable to the Consumer Forum in every aspect covered by educational institute providing education to students.

            In the aforesaid circumstances it is clear that the Complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.28,000/- with interest of 10 % p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint.

            Hence,

O R D E R E D

            CC/24/2016and the same is allowed on contest.

            OP is directed to refund Rs.28,000/- with interest of 10% p.a. from the date of filing of this case till realization within two months of this order.