The case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant is an young unemployed lady and she being attracted of lucrative advertisement of O.P.No.2 who has an authorized Study Centre at the premises of Mc. William H.S.School proposed herself to be admitted in the institution of the said O.P.No.2 to complete her Madhyamik Education from W.B.C.R.O.S. Accordingly, the complainant admitted for the purpose of her Madhyamik education in the year Sessions of 2009. The complainant that after due compliance of all formalities paid all Regd. Fees, examination fees etc. and got her registered vide No.120120041220. Ultimately she had appeared for the Madhyamik examination held on June, 2009 conducted by the O.Ps. Accordingly, the complainant amongst the seven papers failed in History having scoring just 23. After that in the 2010, she appeared again for history and this time she secured pass mark scoring 40.
It is the case of the complainant that the latest mark sheet supplied by the O.P.No.2 mentioned only last four subjects marks and this mark sheet also silent about her division and did not mention whether the complainant passed or failed. Accordingly, the complainant had been to the Study Centre for clarification but the O.P.No.2 did not pay any heed to the problems of the complainant.
It is the further case of the complainant that after completing her Madhyamik examination, she has been provided with an incomplete mark sheet containing marks of last four subjects and that too without mentioning any division or pass/failed remarks.
Thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice through her lawyer but unfortunately the O.P.No.1 did not offer any solution or even did not consider to the life/future of its students and thus the complainant has lost her five(5) valuable years of her young and active age to the uncareful and casual notions of the O.Ps, she has been refused to get a placement in everywhere for not having a decree/certificate of Madhyamik education. Hence, this case.
As such the complainant has prayed for a direction to the O.Ps to make all necessary arrangement to remove irregularity in the mark sheet. The complainant also prayed for an award of Rs.1, 50,000/- for his mental agony and sufferings from the O.Ps and also prayed for an award of Rs.2, 00,000/- for her loss of employment and an award of Rs.1000/- as cost of the litigation.
The complainant has also filed some documents viz. Annexure-A (Mark-sheet of Madhyamik Examination result held on June, 2009), Annexure- B (Mark-sheet of Madhyamik Examination of December, 2010), Annexure-C (Postal acknowledgement of notice to O.P No.1) and an Advocate’s notice (two sheets), Registration, Job Card-B.P.L.
The complainant also filed some documents viz. Original received note dated 24/5/11, Original complaint received dated 29/4/11, Attested Photo copy of original mark sheet and one prospectus of Rabindra Open Vidyalaya Schooling.
In spite of receiving notice, the O.P.No.1 did not turn up to contest the case and hence, the case against him has been proceeded exparte.
O.P.No.2 has appeared before this Forum and filed Written Version on his behalf denying the material allegations contending, inter alia, that the case is not maintainable in law and the complainant has no locus-standi to institute the case and the complainant is not a consumer within the purview of Section 12 of the C. P. Act.
The O.P No.2 denied that he is the authorized Study Centre of Rabindra Mukto Vidyalaya run in Mc. William H.S .School, Alipurduar and no advertisement regarding the courses has been published to attract the students but the students are coming to the study centre on their own feet and understanding.
It is further case of this O.P that O.P.No.2 is just mere a study centre and all the rules, regulations and criteria are settled and observed by the O.P. No.1 i.e. W.B. Council of Rabindra Open Schooling and this O.P is a facilitator providing study materials, and conducting examination as per the guideline provided by O.P.No.1. The O.P.No.2 further averred that the complainant got back in history paper in the year 2009 June sessions and she appeared in the examination again in the 2010 in the said Board and if there is any anomaly occurred to her mark-sheet, the complainant should have submit a prayer to the O.P.No.1 directly or through this O.P. But no such prayer has been made by the complainant to rectify her mark-sheet, so the O.Ps cannot be held liable for the negligence and careless attitude to the complainant.
This O.P has further averred that it is settled procedure for the Board that the marks for the second mark-sheet would be verified by this institution i.e West Bengal Council for Rabindra Open Schooling and if any mistake occurred the student should inform the matter to O.P No.1 in her own handwriting for correction of mark-sheet. This O.P also averred that an ambiguous notice was served by the complainant and that very time they verbally informed the complainant regarding all procedure for rectification of her mark-sheet.
As such this O.P has no negligence and deficiency in service on their part. This O.P denied the other allegations made by the complainant and has prayed for dismissal of the present case.
The complainant and O.P No.2 have filed evidence on affidavit which appears to be the reiterated version of complaint as well as W/V. The complainant also filed written argument. The O.P.No.2 did not file any written argument. Ld .Agent for O.P.No.2 submitted that he will not file written argument and the W/V filed by him treated as written argument.
Heard argument of Ld. Agent for the complainant and also the Ld. Agent for the O.P.No.2.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the complainant a consumer u/s. 2(1) (d) (ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Whether the Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the instant case?
- Have the O.Ps any deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- To what other relief or reliefs, the complainant is entitled to?
DECISIONS WITH REASON
Point No.1 and 2-
It appears that the complainant admitted in the Institution of O.P No.2/Rabindra Muktya Bidyalaya to complete the Madhyamik Education in the Session of year 2009 and got Registration being No.120120041220 at the Council of O.P.No.1/Secretary, W.,B. Council of Rabindra Open Schooling Bikash Bhaban, Kolkata. The complainant failed in subject History in the said examination out of other subjects viz. Bengali, English, Mathematics, Physical Science, Life Science and Geography (failed in History out of seven subjects).
Now, in this case, the complainant has prayed for removal of irregularity in the Mark-sheet. The complainant has alleged that she lost her employment opportunity due to non receipt of Madhyamik certificate though she had paid the examination fees before O.P.No.2 in favour of O.P.No.1 i.e Council of Rabindra Open Schooling.
In our considered view, the Council of Rabindra Open Schooling is not a service provider. The student who appeared an examination is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1),(o), (d) of the C .P. Act, 1986. The Board/Council is a statutory authority whose function was to conduct the school examinations. The statutory function involving different stages is a non commercial function. Participation by a student in a general examination is not an availment of service by student and the examination fee paid by the student is not a consideration for availment of any service.
The claim as sought for in this case is lower than the pecuniary limit of this Forum. It is true
that this case has been filed within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.
Therefore, the Point No.1 is answered negative i.e. against the complainant and Point No.2 is answered affirmative i.e in favour of the complainant.
Point No.3 and 4:-
The complainant had filed this case for directing the O.Ps to pay attention to the problem of the complainant and to make all necessary arrangements to remove the irregularity in the mark-sheet and to meet up her mental agony and suffering and also lost of her employment amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- respectively. The complainant has also prayed for giving direction to pay Rs.1000/-towards the cost of litigation.
Fact remains that the complainant admitted in the Institution of O.P.No.2 to complete her Madhyamik Examination through West Bengal Council of Rabindra Schooling ( W.B.C.R.O.S). She had paid the Regd.fees, examination fees etc. She registered her name in the said Council and she appeared in Madhyamic Examination in June, 2009 which conducted by O.Ps.
Fact remains further that the complainant out of seven papers failed in subject history only on securing 23 marks. On the next sessions, the complainant appeared again for examination of her back paper i.e. subject history and she scored 40 marks in that subject. The complainant got mark-sheet of the above said examinations but the mark-sheet remained silent about her division whether she passed or failed. It has been alleged by complainant that she had been to study centre several times for clarification and redressal but they did nothing about the problem of her. As a result, the complainant’s life is being spoiled due to negligent and careless act of the O.Ps and due to non supply of Madhyamik certificate. Actually the complainant has passed Madhyamick examination in two phases i.e. if two mark-sheets are jointly be considered.
It has been further alleged by complainant that a legal notice was sent to the O.Ps on 11.6.15 but the O.Ps did not reply anything to the complainant. The O.P neglected to remove the irregularity from their ends which the complainant is being suffered.
The O.P.No.2 completely denied the allegations as referred by complainant. It is admitted fact that the complainant admitted in Madhyamik examination through O.P.No.2/Rabindra Mukta Bidyalaya in two sessions in the year 2009 and 2010 and there is no anomaly in the mark sheet which the complainant got from O.P No.2. According to O.P. No.2, the complainant has made no prayer to rectify or correction of her mark-sheet. The O.Ps cannot be held liable for the negligence and careless attitude of the complainant. If any unintentional mistake happens, the complainant should inform the matter to O.P.No.1 for correction of the mark-sheet. There is no negligence and deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief from this Forum. At the time of hearing argument, the Ld. Agent for the complainant has filed a Booklet of Rules and Regulations of Madhyamik Examination published in April, 2014 in relation to the O.P No.1/W.B. Council of Rabindra Open Schooling. Perused the said booklet.
We have closely scrutinized all the Clauses of said Rabindra Open Schooling particularly Clause No. 5 & 6. It has been mentioned therein that the MadhyamiK certificate will not be provided to the students unless the students have passed all seven subjects.
We have already observed that the Council is not a Service provider and a student who took an examination is not a consumer u/s. 2(1)(o),(d) of C. P. Act. In this case, it is not hiring in service in the Educational Institution for conducting exams and declaring its result. In our view, that the complainant is not a consumer and therefore neither complaint can be entertained nor such reliefs can be granted under the C. P. Act. The case is not performing any “service” which had been hired or availed of for consideration. There is no consumer dispute in this case.
Therefore, having heard the Ld. Agents of both sides and on considering the materials on record, we are constrained to hold that the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as sought for in this case.
Thus, the points are decided against the complainant.
All the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the C.C No.32 of 2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest against O.P. No.2 and dismissed exparte against O.P.No.1.
Let a plain copy of this Final Order be supplied to the concerned parties by hand/be sent under registered post with A/D forthwith for information and necessary action.
Dictated & Corrected by me.
