NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/265/2017

RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY - Complainant(s)

Versus

PRIYANKA SAHA - Opp.Party(s)

MR. ARUNANGSHU CHAKRABORTY

07 Nov 2017

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 263 OF 2017
 
(Against the Order dated 19/12/2016 in Appeal No. 886/2015 of the State Commission West Bengal)
1. RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY
DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION RABINDRA BHAVAN, EE-9 & 10,SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY,
KOLKATA-700106
WEST BENGAL
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. JAYATI ROY CHOWDHURY
D/O. SISIR ROY CHOWDHURY, R/O. 98/3,(NEW 386) R.N. GHUA ROAD,
KOLKATA-700074
WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)
REVISION PETITION NO. 264 OF 2017
 
(Against the Order dated 19/12/2016 in Appeal No. 887/2015 of the State Commission West Bengal)
1. RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY
DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION RABINDRA BHAVAN, EE-9 & 10,SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY,
KOLKATA-700106
WEST BENGAL
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. SANJIB BISWAS
S/O. SUDHIR BISWAS, R/O. VILLAGE & POST TARAKNAGAR,
DISTRICT-NADIA-741502
WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)
REVISION PETITION NO. 265 OF 2017
 
(Against the Order dated 19/12/2016 in Appeal No. 888/2015 of the State Commission West Bengal)
1. RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY
DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION RABINDRA BHAVAN, EE-9 & 10,SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY,
KOLKATA-700106
WEST BENGAL
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. PRIYANKA SAHA
D/O. SRI SIBESWAR SAHA, R/O. 26/1, NABIN MUKHERJEE LANE, SHIBPUR,
HOWRAH-711102
WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)
REVISION PETITION NO. 266 OF 2017
 
(Against the Order dated 19/12/2016 in Appeal No. 889/2015 of the State Commission West Bengal)
1. RABINDRA BHARATI UNIVERSITY
DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION RABINDRA BHAVAN, EE-9 & 10,SECTOR II, SALT LAKE CITY,
KOLKATA-700106
WEST BENGAL
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. MOUSUMI DAS
D/O. SRI SUNIL DAS, R/O. AT P.S. SINGUR, VILL & P.O. KAMARKUNDU,
DISTRICT-HOOGHLY-712407
WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN,PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. M. SHREESHA,MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Mr. Arunangshu Chakraborti, Advocate
Mr. S. Bandhopadhyay, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. Kunal Chatterji, Advocate
Mr. Saurav Gupta, Advocate
Mr. Subir Chatterjee, Advocate

Dated : 07 Nov 2017
ORDER

These 4 Revision Petitions, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”), by Rabindra Bharati University (for short “the University”), the sole Opposite Party in the Complaints under the Act, are directed against separate orders, all dated 19.12.2016, passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Kolkata (for short “the State Commission”) in First Appeals No. 886, 887, 888 & 889 of 2015 respectively.  By the impugned orders, the State Commission has affirmed the orders dated 17.07.2015 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North 24 Pgs, Barasat (for short “the District Forum”) in Complaint Cases No. 599, 600, 601 & 610 of 2014. 

In the first instance, while accepting the Complaints, filed by the Respondents herein, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the University in holding the Post Graduate Diploma Course in NGO Management for the Academic Session 2011-12, for which they had paid the total course fee amounting to ₹15,000/- at a short notice, and, thus, depriving them of a due notice to get ready to take the said examination, the District Forum had directed the University to pay to each of the Complainants a sum of ₹15,000/-, along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the Complaints till realization, as also ₹5,000/- as litigation costs.  The District Forum had also directed that if the said amounts were not paid to the Complainants within one month from the date of its orders, the University shall be liable to deposit in the State Consumer Welfare Fund a sum of ₹100/- per day as punitive damages from the date of the said orders till realization. 

Upon notice, the Respondents/Complainants are represented by their Counsel.

At the outset, learned Counsel appearing for the University has brought to our notice two orders, dated 09.08.2012 and 29.04.2013, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in P.T. Koshy & Anr. v. Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 22532/2012] and Prof. K.K. Ramachandran v. S. Krishnaswamy & Anr. [Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 3789/2012], respectively.   By the said orders, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to hold that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Maharshi Dayanand University v. Surjeet Kaur, 2010 (11) SCC 159, wherein all earlier judgments on the issue had been referred to, the educational institutions were not providing any kind of service and, therefore, in the matter of admission, fees etc. there cannot be a question of deficiency of service and, hence, such matters cannot be entertained by the Consumer Fora under the Act.

Per contra, in support of his stand that the orders passed by Fora below were justified, learned Counsel appearing for the Complainants has relied upon the following judgments/orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Commission:

Supreme Court Judgments

 

  1. Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital v. Bhupesh Khurana, 2009 (4) SCC 484;

     

  2. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Shiv Kumar Joshi, 2000 (1) SCC 98;

     

  3. Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh, 2004 (5) SCC 65; and

     

  4. Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, 1994 (1) SCC 243.

 

National Commission orders

  1. Ajay Kumar v. L.N. Mithila University and Ors. (Revision Petition No. 4072 of 2014) – SLP filed, being SLP (C) No.19424 of 2017, was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 11.08.2017.

     

  2. Mody University of Science and Technology & Ors. V. Megha Gupta (Revision Petition No. 3288 of 2016) – No SLP was filed against this order;

     

  3. Jai Kumar Mittal v. Brilliant Tutorials, 2005 (4) CPJ 156 (NC);

     

  4. Frankfinn Institute of Air Hostess Training v. Ashwini G. (Revision Petition No.917 of 2009);

     

  5. Indian Institute of Hotel Management v. Reshmi Dutta (Revision Petition No. 2352 of 2010);

     

  6. WLC College India Ltd. v. Ajay S. Bhatt, III (2016) CPJ 280 (NC); and

     

  7. Deputy Registrar (Colleges) v. Ruchika Jain, III (2006) CPJ 343 (NC).

     

    Further, making a valiant attempt to convince us that apart from the fact that decisions in P.T. Koshy (supra) and Prof. K.K. Ramachandran, relied upon by Counsel appearing for the University, are clearly distinguishable on facts, learned Counsel has submitted that in the afore-noted two decisions the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital (supra), wherein certain decisions rendered by the Constitution Bench have been referred to, has not been noticed and, therefore, the decisions cited on behalf of the University, being per-incurium, are not binding on us.

    Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the material on record, including the precedents cited by them in support of their rival stands, we are unable to persuade ourselves to agree with learned Counsel for the Complainants.

    As noted above, the decisions of the Supreme Court in P.T. Koshy (supra) and Prof. K.K. Ramachandran (supra) are directly on the point arising for consideration in these cases and have been rendered after the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital (supra).  We are bound by the ratio of both the decisions.

    Accordingly, following the afore-noted decisions in P.T. Koshy (supra) and Prof. K.K. Ramachandran (supra), the Revision Petitions are allowed; the impugned orders are set aside; and the Complaints are dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.                  

 
......................J
D.K. JAIN
PRESIDENT
......................
M. SHREESHA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.