National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Sh. Dhirendra Kumar (Dead)& Ors. vs Mr. M.R. Sarangapani & Ors. on 14 January, 2015
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI ORIGINAL PETITION NO. 255 OF 2001 1. Sh. Dhirendra Kumar (Dead) Pkt.-A, Flat No. 389, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi-110 044 2. Sh. Saurabh Kumar Pkt.-A, Flat No.-389, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi-110 044 3. Sh. Sasi Kumar 657, Pkt.-E, Mayur Vihar-II, Delhi-110 091 4. Sh. Shreejit Sasi Kumar 657, Pkt.-E, Mayur Vihar-II, Delhi-110 091 5. Sh. A. Narayanan C-135, Govindpuri, Modi Nagar, U.P.-201201 6. Sh. A. Sreedharan C-135, Govindpuri, Modi Nagar, U.P.-201201 7. Sh. V. Nandakumar AB 135, Shanthi Colony, Chennai-600 040 8. Sh. V. Yoginder AB 135, Shanthi Colony, Chennai-600 040 9. Sh. Chakola Kochappa Pius P.O. Box-33182, AI Raudha, Kuwait 73452 10. Sh. Joseph Pius Chakola P.O. Box-33182, Al Raudha, Kuwait 73452 Complainants Versus 1. Mr. M.R. Sarangapani, Dean, Merit-IIT, 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamilnadu PIN-643 001 2. Smt. S. Shaalini, Director-Administration. Merit-IIT, 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamilnadu PIN-643 001 3. Mr. S. Harsha Vardhan Director-Academics, Merit-IIT, 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamilnadu PIN-643 001 4. Ms. S. Vandana, Executive Director, Merit-IIT, 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamilnadu PIN- 643 001 OPs-1 to 4 through: Sh. Virender Sarin (SPA) B-153, (GF) Gujrawalan Town, Delhi-9 Ph.No.27233059 5. Merit International Institute of Technology, Through its Dean Mr. M.R. Sarangapani, 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamilnadu - 643 001 Opposite Parties BEFORE: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER For the Complainants : Mr. Arun Sukhija, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Q.H. Khan, Advocate PRONOUNCED ON 14TH JANUARY, 2014 O R D E R
JUSTICE J.M. MALIK
1. Money is a bottomless sea, in which honour, conscience and truth may be drowned. However, law is the backbone which keeps man erect.
2. Sh. Saurabh Kumar, complainant No.2, Sh. Shreejit Sasi Kumar, complainant No.4, Sh. A. Sreedharan, Complainant No.6, Sh. V. Yoginder, complainant No.8 and Sh. Joseph Pius Chakola, complainant No.10 are the students, who have filed their cases along with complainant Nos. 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9, who are their fathers, respectively, against the OPs. Complainant No.1 has since passed away and his LR, complainant No.2, is already on the record.
3. The above said five student-complainants were lured by an advertisement inserted by Merit International Institute of Technology, OP5, which offered undergraduate Degree Courses, specialized in the subjects like Robotic Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Bio-informatics, Information Technology, Computer Science, Biomedical Engineering, Genetic Engineering, Electrical, Electronic Engineering, etc. Copy of the said advertisement has been placed on record as Annexure A. The said advertisement mentions that OP5 was recognized by foreign Universities.
4. The student-complainants visited the website of OP5. Copy of the website pages have been placed on record as Annexure B. Few claims made on the website are reproduced here as under :
a) That OP No.5 was not only recognized in India but was globally recognized.
b) That OP No.5 had a well-qualified and trained faculty. c) That OP No.5 had visiting faculty from India and abroad.
d) That OP No.5 had a well equipped library.
e) That OP No.5 pursued high academic standards and had adopted state-of-the-art teaching methodology with learning tools and equipment.
f) That OP No.5 was offering a Bachelor Degree in Engineering in highly specialized subjects like Robotic Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Bio-informatics, Information Technology, Computer Science, Biomedical Engineering, Genetic Engineering, Electrical, Electronic Engineering, etc.
g) That the students had option of doing their post-graduate studies abroad. This suggests that the Bachelor of Engineering degree of OP No.5 was recognized abroad.
h) Under the title Affiliation, Articulation, Co-operation and memberships, the names of a string of foreign universities were mentioned to suggest that OP No.5 was recognized by all these universities and these universities would accept students from OP No.5 for post-graduate studies.
i) It is further claimed that OP No.5 has a placement cell and the graduates from OP No.5 are placed in key positions in the Industry and are spread over in India, USA, Canada, Australia, Europe, Middle East and Far East.
j) That website further listed the detailed curriculum being followed in the undergraduate courses offered by OP No.5. It also provided detailed list of laboratories associated with each semester. This suggests that theoretical studies and laboratory experiments were to go hand-in-hand in each semester. It also suggests the existence of well-equipped laboratories.
5. The prospectus, marked as Annexure C, reiterates all these facts. The complainants visited the office of the OP No.5, situated at Ooty. OPs 1 to 4 are the functionaries of OP No.5. Mr. M.R. Sarangapani, Dean, OP 1 had invited Dr. Tarek Sobh, Director, School of Engineering & Design, University of Bridgeport, USA, to address the parents of the prospective students. Dr. Tarek Sobh was very convincing and drew very rosy picture of OP No.5, suggesting that OP5 is affiliated to University of Bridgeport. Subsequently, it transpired that he made a false claim. All the student-complainants took the admission in different Degree Courses of OP No.5. They had to pay heavy fees for taking admission. First of all, the OPs, originally demanded exorbitant fees, but when they found that the response of the students was lukewarm, they issued a revised fee-structure, copy of which has been placed on record, as Annexure D. Some of the students had to pay the original fee.
Complainant No.6 paid higher amount of fee in the sum of ₹ 95,000/- per Semester. However, Annexure D, reveals that OPs were charging ₹ 50,000/- as the regular semester fee, for each semester. In additional, the one-time registration fee, ranging between ₹2,00,000/- to ₹ 3,50,000/- depending upon the subject choice, was being charged from each student. In addition to the above said sum, equivalent USD 900 was being charged, per annum, as examination fee. They gave the justification that the examination papers were being prepared and conducted by foreign universities and the answer sheets of the students were also being evaluated by professors from foreign universities. As a matter of fact, no foreign university or no foreign Professor was involved in the conduct of the examinations.
6. Complainant No.3 sent a letter dated 22.06.2000 to the OPs enquiring whether OP No.5 was approved by the Government of India, which university was it affiliated to, in India and whether adequate facilities like workshop, library, laboratories, etc., were available. He also enquired whether competent faculty was available with OP No.5. OP No.5 gave response to this letter vide Annexure F stating that the it is in the process of obtaining Deemed University Classification by next year and that the current Degree Certificates would be given by Anna University, through AMIE.
Further, it mentioned that it has well established Library, Laboratory, Workshop and Faculty.
7. The student-complainants completed one year of their course, comprising two semesters, in the said institution. From the very start, it transpired that OP 5 had no faculty, whatsoever, for most specialized subjects. In case of general subjects, like physics, chemistry, the farce of holding classes was kept up by Lab Assistants and such other non-qualified staff who had no clue of the subjects were being taught. They adopted a simple strategy of following one specific book for a subject and the class instructions were confined to just reading through the book.
8. The complaints made by the student-complainants were met with the assurance that the management was making efforts to recruit competent faculty and the students should bear with the management, for the time being. Due to non-availability of qualified faculty, the following subjects were not taken up :-
a) Applied mechanics under Basic Engineering
b) Linear Algebra
c) Probability and Statistics
d) Signals and Systems
e) Basic Electronics.
The students were informed that the above said subjects would be covered in the next semester. However, even during the next semester, 2-3 chapters were taught by unqualified faculty. The students were being taught Advance Calculus in first semester and pre-calculus in second semester.
9. There were practically, no laboratories. The Chemistry Lab did not have even proper work stations. Sufficient lab equipment was not available, there was no laboratory for Autocad, there was no microprocessor laboratory, there was no workshop which was the basis for any engineering college. There was also no laboratory for highly technical subjects like Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Genetics, Microbiology, Biochemistry, etc.
10. The OPs did not have well equipped library. The books being followed by the teachers were not available for the students. Due to this, book on chemistry was scanned and the students were advised to read the same of the computer screen. The information regarding affiliation was changing from time to time. It transpired that they had no relationship, whatsoever, with OP 5. Copies of said emails, have been placed on record as Annexure H. OP 3 claimed that OP 5 was affiliated to Annamalai University.
The OP 3 admitted, vide Annexure I, that OP 5 is not recognized in India and has no affiliation with any university in India. The OP 3 also claimed that after completion of four years at OP 5, the degree shall be issued by Bridgeport University and that OP 5 cannot issue a recognized degree to the students after completion of the four-year engineering course. Further, the response of OP 3 also contained that OP5 had affiliation to Bridgeport University as well as Gannon University.
However, on enquiry by complainant No.8, the Gannon University denied of having any relationship with OP 5.
11. OP 1 and 2 relied upon the letters from Mr. Tarek Sobh and claimed that OP 5 is affiliated to Bridgeport University and that an engineering degree shall be issued to students of OP5 by Bridgeport University. However, none of these letters justify the claim of OPs that the engineering degree shall be issued to the complainants by Bridgeport University. The letters also contained information that even for admission to post graduate course at Bridgeport University, the complainants were required to produce undergraduate degree from India, even after unification of syllabi of OP No.5 with Bridgeport University. The said letters have been placed on record as Annexure J. Complainant No.5 emailed some queries to Mr. Tarek Sobh, who sent a very vague reply and when he was pressed to be specific, he responded with a rude letter. The said correspondence has been placed on record as Annexure K.
12. Complainant No.9 wrote a letter to OP No.3 about the lack of infrastructure, etc., copy of which has been paced on record as Annexure L. In response to it, OP 3 admits in his letter, annexed as Annexure M, that this point was made clear at the very start about the lack of laboratory facilities and there would be no laboratory work in second semester while the same would start only in third semester.
13. The OPs had also obtained original educational certificates from the said student-complainants. First of all, OP3 had indicated that the original educational certificates have been sent to Bridgeport University for verification. He spoke to OP1 and on instructions from OP1 requested the parents of the complainants to make a written request for return of the original certificates informing that they wish to withdraw their sons from the OP 5. The needful was done but the complainants wanted the refund of the amount paid by them. Copy of the said letter has been annexed with the complaint as Annexure O. The OP 3 did not return the documents on one pretext or the other, vide Annexure P. The parents made a futile tour to Ooty for getting the certificates.
14. A legal notice was sent on 15.07.2001, which was replied on 23.07.2001. Both the legal notice and reply were proved on record as Annexures Q & R, respectively.
Ultimately, this complaint was filed before this Commission, on 16.08.2001, with the following prayers :-
a) to pass an order directing the Opposite Parties to pay a total sum of Rs.41,95,566/- (Rupees Forty One Lakhs Ninety Five Thousands Five Hundred and Sixty Six only) with interest as compensation to the Complainants for the total expenses incurred by them, for the loss of full one academic year of the Complainants 2,4,6 and 10 and for harassment and pain suffered by them on account the failure of the OPs in providing services (Engineering education) as per the promises made at the time of admission and/or as per the accepted norms for such services;
b) to pass an order directing the OPs not to illegally detain the original certificates of the Complainant students nos. 2,4,6,8 and 10 and to immediately dispatch the same through courier to the respective students;
c) to pass an order directing the OPs to immediately stop all admissions to OP no. 5 till such time they are able to get recognition from any university;
d) to pass an order directing the OPs to refrain from indulging in unfair trade practices publishing false information to the public in respect of OP no. 5 and to further direct to publish a fresh advertisement in well-read National Daily Newspapers withdrawing their earlier misleading advertisements and to place correct picture before the public at large and;
e) to pass such other or further order or orders as this Honble Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and to meet the ends of justice.
DEFENCE :
15. The OPs admitted that they had inserted the above-said advertisement. The students and their parents were well aware of the fact that at no time, it was claimed that the courses or the Institution comes under the purview of All India Council of Technical Education. The complainants had seen the campus prior to seeking admission and were well aware of the situation. The OPs have listed the following points in their favour :-
4.
a) That the courses offered under the guidance of Bridgeport University, USA is recognized for higher studies in well reputed, established Universities in USA and other developed countries such as Australia, Canada, etc.
b) That OP No.5 had and continues to have well qualified and trained faculty at all times.
c) That there were visiting faculty from India and Abroad and the frequency will be more during finishing semesters as the students would have acquired the basics and will be ready to absorb the advanced / specialization knowledge.
d) That the library was well equipped from the inception with national and international volumes, books, periodicals, professional magazines and electronic library accessible to all students.
e) That high academic standards are kept in OP No.5. In addition, every student is equipped with personal laptop to make learning more effective.
f) That the students have the option of doing their post-graduate studies abroad as there are no post-graduate studies offered presently in India in these specialized fields. Since the students complete their studies in OP No. 5 campus with high credit points they are accepted in leading, reputed universities in abroad for further studies.
g) That it is a normal practice that when a student completes studies with certain credit points, they are accepted in universities abroad for further studies.
h) That it is true that the students are placed in several countries during the past several years. Even leading companies like Disney world, USA and American Hospitality Association comes to Ooty for campus selection.
i) That the theory classes and laboratory experiments were conducted as prescribed for each semester.
16. There are two other campuses in Ooty. Dr. Tarek Sobh, Director, School of Engineering & Design, University of Bridgeport, USA, came as a visiting faculty and as a Chief Guest for a function held in the campus. Students have received him along with the Guest of honour, Dr. M.R. Srinivasan, a well known Scientist and former Chairman of Atomic Energy, India and Member of Planning Commission. Fees included tuition fee, well furnished, temperature controlled attached bath student accommodation, morning breakfast, mid-morning coffee / tea, afternoon lunch, evening tea and night dinner, electricity and water charges. The institution has an additional option for doing AMIE which is recognized by the Anna University. The OP had laboratory, workshop, faculty and has educational courses of international repute for the past ten years. Over 1000 students from India and abroad have been educated in its campus and are employed all over the world.
They are also employed as IAS, IPS, Defence Officers, in India. The OPs had got qualified staff. Sufficient administrative staff, directors, senior faculty, Heads of Department to oversee the quality of teaching and get students feed- back to ensure high standard of learning. Pre-calculus and Advanced Calculus were taught systematically. Pre-calculus was revised in the second semester, prior to the examinations. Since the students had been taught some six months earlier. This revision is not an unusual practice in any institution. There are sufficient copies of books in the library. It is contended that the exams are conducted in co-ordination with the Bridgestone University, USA.
17. Again, OP 5 is not a University to issue Degree Certificates, whereas, courses are conducted in Ooty campus and on completion of the same, the students can pursue their further studies in Bridgeport, USA. In USA, Government does not control or grade universities. They are graded by the regional body and Bridgeport University is accredited by New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). By virtue of NEASC accreditation, students have been assessed to enter into any reputed accredited Universities throughout USA.
18. Dr. Tarek Sobh is not only the Director but also the President of Bridgeport University, USA, who visited the campus and addressed the students. These officials make a periodical visit to the campus to ensure high standards of teaching, facilities and to interact with students and faculty. Unnecessary letters were written to Dr. Tarek Sobh. In the prospectus, it was mentioned that the first year of the course is common to all categories of Engineering Branches with introduction of Workshops and Laboratories. OP5 was fully equipped with all the workshops and laboratories with modern facilities for the rest of the course. Students have attended the workshop and lab introductory classes. From third semester, i.e. second year onwards, the students are segregated as per the branch and practicals are taken. Complainant No.9 has suppressed this fact. The academic performance of the complainant No.10 during I & II was not satisfactory and he was not interested to continue with his studies in India. He failed in most of the subjects and obtained zero marks in a few subjects.
It is surprising to note that a student who has not obtained even the minimum eligible marks in many subjects is worried about the laboratory facilities and practicals meant for III semester. It is alleged that the complainants came to Ooty during summer vacation and was under the influence of alcohol and were behaving rudely. They were asked to approach the office during the working day after the reopen.
19. The complainants did not clear the arrears and therefore their certificates were not returned. It is alleged that one-time fee is not the capitation fee and it is registration fee at the commencement of the course paid only once for the entire course to cover additional requirements such as TOEFL, GRE, GMAT and other registration formalities required for a student to continue their studies in USA. The fees included note books, computer, which usually ranges from ₹ 1,00,000/- to ₹ 2,00,000/- as market price. The complainants are still in possession of the same. The allegation of capitation fee is merely pretention as they are keeping the valuable laptop with them. The present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
The complainants are claiming exorbitant amounts. After completion of two years, the students may continue further two years in the Bridgeport University, USA, directly or study in OPs itself. The Bridgeport University will give final certificates to the students and the students who completes four-year course can be admitted in the Bridgeport University for the Post-Graduate courses.
20. Again, the Alagappa University, affiliated to UGC, Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu in its advertisement in the Hindu, as declared OP 5 as their Centre for Entrepreneur Development even for advanced computer learning and a copy has been annexed with the Reply. Many institutions abroad have come forward to offer their degrees and permits to study in India and a copy of the advertisement issued by the London University, published in the Commonwealth Currents, March, 2001 is annexed along with the Reply.
SUBMISSIONS AND FINDINGS :
21. Both the parties have invited our attention to the advertisement, Annexure - A. This is a very lengthy advertisement. Its relevant portion is reproduced here as under :-
Unique features of the course : International Engineering & IT Courses, in world-class campus, a Technology & Management integrated course -- The program provides high flexibility in the curriculum by incorporating self-study, projects, electives and industry visits -- Global recognition Unique location. Located at the hill station Ooty, once the British Education Capital State of the art teaching methodology to make learning easier Personal laptop / notebook computers to teach students, which could be retained by them even after completion of the course Personality Development Grooming & Etiquettes -- Simultaneous GRE/GMAT and TOEFL Twinning Degree Visiting faculty from India and overseas Guaranteed admissions in USA / Australia for higher education (MS / MBA) Internship options in India, USA and Australia Financial Assistance / Sponsorship options for overseas study Well-furnished residential accommodation for boys and girls Overseas students in residential campus Campus interviews, placement, VISA and overseas travel assistance, anywhere in the world, including Australia and USA.
4 years Degree (BEDS, B. Tech) 4 years Degree (with Honors) 5 years Degree (Certification of two degrees) 5 years Engineering & .
(completion in Australia) 6 years . (completion in USA / Australia) Merits Affiliation, articulation, co-operation and membership :
Indian Society for technical Education, IIT Campus, New Delhi. The Institution of Engineers (India), Centre for Entrepreneur Development Training & Consultancy Agency for Industries, Government of India. The Association for International Practical Training, USA, International Electrical & Electronics Engineers Society.
Alliances Abroad, USA, University of Western Sydney, Australia, Sheffield Hallam University, UK and in addition, reputed American Universities in the States of Arizona, California, Flordia, Goergia, Illionsis, Indiana, .. Maryland, Michigan, New Jersy, New.. New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington DC (the choice offered is very wide in view of varied interests and options of students).
Unique features : Trendsetter in hospitality management education Located in a popular hill resort and tourist destination Attached star class hotel -- Worldwide accepted curriculum Exclusive labs and training restaurants International affiliations Global career Overseas training and placement Flexibility in curriculum Merit has the unique distinction of hosting hospitality professionals during FHRAI convention and has received unparalleled appreciation & acceptance by professionals from India and abroad.
Affiliations, articulations & Membership :
Association of Educational Institutes for Catering & Hotel Mgt. --- American Hotel and Hotel Association The Association for international Practical Training The Federation of Hotel & Restaurant Association of India Indian Society for Technical Education Centre for Entrepreneur Development Hotel Association of India Griffith University International Hotel & Restaurant Association Johnson & Wales University University of Delaware Sheffield Hallam University University of Western Sydney University of South Austarlia Swiss School of Hotel and Tourism Management, Switzerland.
22. We have gone through the web pages of website www.merit.iit.org , marked as Annexure B. Its relevant portion runs as follows :-
It is founded by eminent, experienced, educator, consultant and philanthropist with a success of over 25 years and is governed by like-minded professionals with a proven track record.
MBA : On completion of fourth year degree program Meritors can choose to do MBA program to complete within duration of one year. This accelerated program is offered at MERIT campus and alternatively can be completed in Australia. Students can avail the assistance for obtaining priority admission, VISA, travel assistance and ..
DEGREE COURSES OFFERED AT MERIT-IIT:
. B. Tech-ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-
AI/ROBOTIC ENGINEERING . B. Tech- BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING . B. Tech BIOTECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING . B. E.- COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING . B.E.- COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING . B.E. ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING . B. Tech- GENETIC ENGINEERING . B. Tech- INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY . B. Tech- VLSI ENGINEERING/EMBEDDED SYSTEMS.
The above said website consists of about 35 pages and contains the details of each Branch, semester, subjects, etc.
23. Now, let us turn to the prospectus. The prospectus runs into about 36 pages. It mentions about USA, Australia, UK, Switzerland and all the European countries.
It also mentions, as under :-
ENGINEERING DEGREE WITH HONOURS :
Students will to do an additional semester consisting of added specialization subjects ; research paper along with the students meritorious performance will receive Honors Degree. This is yet another fast track to achieve better global career opportunities.
TWINNING DEGREE Students have an option to combine the subjects of two different engineering degree courses and can successfully complete Twinning degree program in five years time.
DEGREE PROGRAMS OFFERED BY MERIT-IIT :
1. B.Tech- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AI/ ROBOTIC ENGINEERING
2. B.Tech- BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
3. B.Tech- BIOTECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING
4. B.E.- COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
5. B.E.- ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING
6. B.E.- ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
7. B. Tech.- GENETIC ENGINEERING
8. B. Tech.- INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
9. B. Tech- VLSI ENGINEERING/EMBEDDED SYSTEMS.
24. Vide letter dated 22.06.2000, Sh. Harsha Vardhan, Director (Academics) of MERIT-IIT, wrote to Sh. Sasi Kumar, complainant No.3, as under :-
1. We are in the process of obtaining Deemed University Classification next year or so, so we would not come under AICTE.
2. As of the current arrangements our Degree Certificates would come from Anna University through AMIE.
3. We have a well-established Library, Laboratory, Workshop and Faculty as well.
4. Even if we are unable to get 100 students, we are going ahead with the Course. There is nothing to worry with regard to this.
5. I appreciate your anxiety but I would advise that too much of anxiety at times leads to confusion.
6. I am sure you will not regret this decision you are making in admitting your son with us at MERIT-IIT.
25. On 06.06.2001, Sh. Christine Elliot, Associate Director of Admissions & International Student Co-ordinator, Gannor University, wrote email to Mr. V. Yoginder, complainant No.8, as under :-
Dear Yoginder, Thank you for your e-mail sent to Gannon University. In your e-mail dated June 3rd, you had asked if Gannon University in Erie, Pennsylvania in the US had a type of affiliation with Merit International Institute of Technology in India. Gannon does not have any affiliation with this school.
I hope this answers your question.
26. Mr. Susan Posch, Study Abroad Centre, Iowa State University, Ames Iowa, USA, wrote email dated
07.06.2001, to Yoginder, as under :-
As is the case with all international institutions, students from MIIT can enrol as degree-seeking students at ISU (transferring to ISU to complete their degree) or as non-degree-seeking students (transferring the credits earned at ISU to their degree at MIIT); however, there is no agreement in effect under which students would be exchanged between the two schools.
27. The first submission made by the counsel for the OPs is that this Commission has got no jurisdiction to decide this case. Secondly, the case of the complainants is worth ₹ 9,00,000/-
each. If there is any deficiency in service, that has happened in the State of Tamil Nadu, where the OPs are running the Institution, in the name of MERIT-IIT at 22, Havelock Road, Ooty, Tamil Nadu. Consequently, the Tamil Nadu courts have got the jurisdiction in this case.
28. This argument is bereft of merit. We have considered the claim made by all the complainants. It is well settled that consumers can join together and file a single case, aggregating their amounts. At that time, only the National Commission had the jurisdiction because when the case was filed, the pecuniary jurisdiction was lying only with this Commission. It appears that this objection has been raised only for the sake of cavil.
29. The key argument advanced by the learned counsel for the OP was that the complainants themselves left the Institute after taking all the facilities and did not pay the balance fee in respect of the service provided by the OPs.
Again, the complainants have asked for huge amount, and as such, their total claim is baseless. It was also argued that 10 years back, the OP 5 introduced Hospitality & Tourism, Management Course with co-operation of institution in USA, Switzerland and Australia because India needed up-to-date the latest technology in certain fields as either students had to go to overseas for higher studies or OP 5 had to import the overseas technology. On 05.06.2002, Alagappa University had given an advertisement. In the advertisement published by London University, in the Commonwealth Currents, March, 2001, with the headline If you cant come to London to study, then London can come to you, the student-complainants availed all the facilities. Complainant No.9 had written a letter from Kuwait to OPs on 26.05.2001 and all the particulars were given to him. Complainant No.9 has suppressed the fact, with ulterior motive. The result of complainant No.10 was not prepared and he made it a ground to leave the Institution. Complainant No.10 insisted that his certificates be returned.
30. It was further argued by the counsel for the OP that the present complaint has not been filed in tune with the provisions of Section 12(c) of the C.P.Act, 1986. All the students are in possession of laptops worth ₹ 2-3 lakhs and their demand is false. It was argued that the students and parents were well aware of the fact that at no time, it was claimed that the courses over the Institution comes under the purview of All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE). The complainants have seen the campus, prior to their admission, visited and satisfied themselves of the amenities/ facilities and standards and enjoyed their studies for one whole year and never complained regarding the same. The courses offered were under the Guidance of Bridgeport University, USA, which is recognized for higher studies in well reputed, established universities in USA and other developed countries, such as Australia, Canada, etc. The arrears were not paid till 10.05.2001. Had the arrears been paid by 10.05.2001, their certificates would have been returned. It was contended that the student-complainants are not the consumers.
31. Instead of touching the heart of problem, the learned counsel for the OP just skirted it. The Constitution Bench of India, in Islamic Academy of Education & Anr. Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.
11286/2003, 11391/2003, 11189-11195/2003 W.P(Civil) Nos. 355/1993, 1742003, T.P.(Civil) No. 286-288/2003 S.L.P.(Civil) Nos. 3465-34662003, 3942-3943/2003, 4002-4003/2003 9253-9254/2003, 10561/2003, W.P.(Civil) Nos. 261/2003, 275/2003 280/2003, 239/2003)697, was pleased to hold for some purposes, the students are the consumers.
32. In Bihar School Examination Board Vs. Suresh Prasad Sinha, (2009) 8 SCC 483, it was held that examination fee paid by the examinee is not a consideration for providing any service. Any dispute relating to fault in holding of examination and non-declaration of result of an examinee does not fall within the purview of the C.P.Act, 1986.
33. However, we are dealing with an altogether different matter, for which, the student-complainants qualify to be the consumers, under the C.P. Act. The advertisement goes to show that they were offering Undergraduate courses in the above said specialized subjects. It also mentioned that OP 5 was recognized by foreign university.
Website papers further submitted that the above said version. It clearly goes to show that gullible persons/students were led up the garden path. The OP5 nowhere stated that it was recognized by an Indian University. This advertisement is conspicuously silent about it. It was a case of malafide intention. Due to this misrepresentation, the students were lured to join OP-5.
Sometimes, it states that it is 25-year old institution, sometimes it states that it is a 10-year old Institute. They did not show the list of students who got placement through OP5.
A period of ten years had elapsed, but there is not even a single proof of placement of a student through OP5. OP 5 could altogether name only one person who visited the faculty, that too, on a function. Dr. Tareh Sohb, University of Bridgeport came along with Mr.M.R.Srinivasan, a well-known scientist, but they could not give the details of all other foreign faculty who had visited the OP 5 Institute. No connection/document with USA, Australia, Canada or Switzerland, saw the light of the day. These are mere allegations. It is stated that the students from more than 36 countries had enjoyed the courses in MERIT-IIT. Their antecedents were not disclosed. On the contrary, it was admitted that less than 100 students had joined their institution. OP5 claimed it was globally recognized. It had a well-trained faculty, it had visiting faculty from India and abroad, it had well equipped library and the students had the option of doing their Post Graduate course from abroad. However, nothing was produced on record to bolster these assertions with solid and unflappable evidence. In the written submissions of the complainant, it was mentioned, as under :-
h) Under the site Affiliation, Articulation, Co-operation and memberships the name of a sting of foreign universities were mentioned to suggest that OP No. 5 was recognized by all these universities and these universities would accept students from OP no.5 for post-graduate studies.
34. The above said advertisement further mentions about well- equipped laboratories. Even the claim made by Dr. Tarek Sohb that MERIT-IIT is affiliated to University of Bridgeport, USA, is false. No documentary evidence was adduced in this respect. Higher fee was charged from complainant No.6 in the sum of ₹ 95,000/-, but others paid a fee of ₹ 50,000/- only.
35. According to the complainants, a book on Chemistry by Raymond Chang was being followed and the same was not available in the Library, hence it was scanned over a period into the computer memory. The scanning was done in a haphazard manner. Some pages were scanned vertically and some were scanned horizontally. There is a letter which shows that it was written to Mr. Yoginder, which reveals that open learning Institute of TOFEL in Brisbane, has no connection with MERIT-IIT. It must be borne in mind that it is the OPs who ought to carry the ball in proving that they are not connected with any of the universities. They have not produced an iota of evidence in this regard, but the students have written email to other universities to winnow truth from falsehood. The OP has no connection with Annamalai University as well.
36. It is also surprising to note that Mr. Tarek Sobh of Bridgeport University could not clarify the condition, when he was pressed to be specific, he replied rudely informing the students to refrain from littering their mail boxes and emails from now on. A copy of the query and reply have been annexed as Annexure I at page 107.
37. The complaint reveals that the letter also claims falsely that after completion of four years at OP NO.5, the Degree shall be issued by Bridgeport University. The claim of getting Deemed University status is also false and baseless.
This is an admitted fact that OP5 cannot give a recognized University certificate to the students after completion of four-year Engineering Course. The admission of lack of laboratory comes out from the letter written by OP 5 to Mr. Chakola, complainant No.10 (at page 122 of paper-book), marked as Annexure M. It has also is stated that about practicals, the students were informed in advance that there will be no practical sessions in semester 2nd and that 3rd semester has 4 practical sessions.
38. It is also clear that original certificates of the complainants were withheld by OP5 for no reason, whatsoever. Since they failed to pay the fees for the next semester, therefore, they were not given the original certificates. This goes to show the arbitrariness, high-handedness, arrogance and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. When the students were going to leave their college, therefore OP should have wasted no time to hand-over the same.
39. The college was running for the last 10 years/25 years. It should have got the laboratory and made other facilities as well. One full year of the students was wasted and their certificates were withheld with an ulterior motive. The OPs should have produced the list of books, list of librarians, list of Lab Assistants and the Lab Technicians, which was not done.
They also did not furnish the list of foreign faculty as advertised, time and again. The case against the OPs stand fully proved.
40. This Commission, in Bhupesh Khurana & Ors., Vs. Vishwa Buddha Parishad & Ors., 2000 (3) CPR 49 (NC), by a 5-Judges Bench, was pleased to hold as under :-
1.
Importing of education by an educational institution for consideration falls within the ambit of service as defined under Consumer Protection Act.
2. Offering admission for a course on representation that college was affiliated with University where as it was not amounts to deficiency in service.
41. Consequently, we allow the complaint and direct OP 5 to pay a sum of ₹ 41,95,566/- in favour of the complainant Nos. 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10, along with interest @ 18% p.a., from the date of deposit, till date, within 90 days, from the date of receipt of copy of this order, otherwise. The said amount be paid to the above mentioned complainants, in equal proportion. No order as to costs.
...
(J. M. MALIK, J) PRESIDING MEMBER dd/22