Delhi

West Delhi

CC/23/21

Surender Shokeen - Complainant(s)

Versus

South point college of law - Opp.Party(s)

02 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-III: WEST, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

C-BLOCK, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PANKHA ROAD, JANAK PURI

NEW DELHI-110058

 

Complaint Case No.21/2023

 

In the matter of

 

Surender Shokeen

S/o Raghubir singh,

B-1/13, Block B-1, Ist Floor,

Mianwali Nagar,

NEW DELHI 110087                                                                                                        …………COMPLAINANT

 

 

VERSUS

1.The Principal, South Point College of Law,

Ratangarh Baghru Road,

Sonipat, Haryana-131022

 

City Campus Office address:

Purkhas Road, Near Sugar Mill,

Sonipat, Haryana        

 

2. The Registrar, MD University.

Rohtak, Haryana

 

 

                                                                             .……… Opposite Party  

CORAM

 

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, President

Ms.Richa Jindal, Member

Mr. Anil Kumar Koushal, Member

Present: Complainant in person                                                   02.02.2023

 

 

  

1.       Complainant submits that  his son Nishant Shokeen had taken admission in OP No.1 College  for pursuing 5 years  BA LL.B   degree course on 23.09.2022 and had also paid the first year’s fee to the college of Rs.30500/-.  Thereafter  the complainant sent email dated 17.10.2022 to both OP No.1 and OP No.2 informing that his son Nishant Shokeen wants to withdraw  his admission from the college of OP No.1 and requested for refund the tuition fee of Rs.30,500/- paid by him.  Though OP No.1 cancelled the admission of son of the complainant on 14.11.2022 but refused to refund the fee paid  on the ground that the admission was cancelled after the closing date of admission of MD University/OP No.2.  

2.       Since  OP No.1 did not refund the amount of fee paid by the complainant for admission of his son which was ultimately got cancelled by him, complainant has filed the present complaint alleging  deficiency in service and  recovery of amount of Rs.30,500/- paid towards fee along with interst.         

3. We may note that education matters are not maintainable before the Consumer Courts .In this regard weplacereliance on the verdict of Hon’bleNCDRC in the case titled Manu Solanki  & Others v/s Vinayaka Mission University (Formerly Known As Vinayaka Mission's Research Foundation Deemed University), Salem & Others, decided on 20.1.2020 in which  the issue of  imparting education and other related issues  has  been dealt with extensively and it was categorically held that education is not a commodity. Educational institutions are not providing any kind of service, therefore, in matter of admission, fees etc., there cannot be a question of deficiency of service. Such matters cannot be entertained by the Consumer Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

                                                                

4. In view of the verdict of the Hon’ble NCDRC, referred to above, the complaintis dismissed in limine as not maintainable.The complainant may pursue his remedy before the appropriate Civil Court.In case the complainant approaches the concerned Civil Court, we hope, the issue of limitation owing to pendency of the present complaint before this Commission, shall be taken into consideration.

File be consigned to record room.

 

(Richa Jindal)                             (Anil Kumar Koushal)                   (Sonica Mehrotra)

                                                      Member                                                   Member                                           President