State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Rayat Bahra Institute Of Engineering ... vs Rohan Deep Manhas on 28 May, 2015
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.578 of 2014
Date of institution : 21.05.2014
Date of decision : 28.05.2015
1. Rayat Bahra Institute of Engineering and Nano Technology
(RBEINT), Village Bohan, Chandigarh Road, Hoshiarpur
through its Campus Director, Mr. D.S. Bawa.
2. Mrs. Kuldeep Walia, Head of the Department, Applied Sciences
(RBEINT), Village Bohan, Hoshiarpur-146 001.
.......Appellants-Opposite parties
Versus
Rohan Deep Manhas aged 18 years s/o Didar Singh, H.No.93, Sant
Harchand Singh Longowal Nagar, Chandigarh Road, Hoshiarpur.
.........Respondent/Complainant
First Appeal against the order dated
17.04.2014 of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, Hoshiarpur.
Quorum:-
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gurdev Singh, President.
Shri Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member.
Present:-
For the appellants : Shri Amritveer Singh, Advocate.
For the respondent : None.
JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH, PRESIDENT :
This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/opposite parties against the order dated 17.04.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hoshiarpur (in short, "District Forum"), vide which the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant, Rohan Deep Manhas, under Section 12 of First Appeal No.578 of 2014. 2 the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") was partly accepted and opposite party No.1 was directed to refund the admission fee of Rs.9,000/- (Rs.10,000.00-Rs.1,000.00) and to pay Rs.2,000/-, as compensation, within a period of 30 days from the receipt of copy of the order; failing which it was directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the aforesaid amount of Rs.11,000/- from the date of order till realization.
2. The complainant alleged, in his complaint, that after completing his 10+2 examination, he applied for provisional registration in opposite party No.1-Institute on 3.6.2013 and deposited the sum of Rs.10,700/-, vide Receipts Nos.3351 and 32316, for admission in Mechanical Engineering. At that time he was promised by the official of opposite party No.1-Institute that in case he did not report and attend classes after confirmation of seat in the stream sought for, except Rs.700/- as the fee for administrative charges, the remaining amount would be refundable. Besides applying for the Mechanical Engineering in the aforesaid Institute, he also applied for same stream and LL.B in other Institutions as well, so that he may not mischance to have admission in any discipline. Finding no favourable response he lost hope for admission in the M.E. (Mechanical Engineering) in opposite party No.1-Institute and started vigorously pursuing his application with the Panjab University for B.A. LL.B (Hons). On 31.8.2013 he received a letter from opposite party No.1-Institute to report for the studies or otherwise his name would be struck off after 30.8.2013. However, he got admission in Panjab First Appeal No.578 of 2014. 3 University B.A. LL.B (Hons) on 31.8.2013 before receiving the letter from opposite party No.1-Institute. 1st of September 2013 being Sunday, he immediately moved an application to opposite party No.1- Institute for the refund of the said sum, but the same was not refunded despite repeated personal visits. As a result thereof, he suffered a lot of inconvenience, harassment, frustration and mental agony. This act and conduct of opposite party No.1 not only amounts to deficiency of service but also unfair trade practice. He prayed for the issuance of direction to the opposite parties to refund the sum of Rs.10,000/-; besides payment of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.5,000/-, as cost of litigation.
3. Opposite parties filed joint written reply before the District Forum. In the written reply they admitted that the complainant applied for provisional registration on 3.6.2013 for Mechanical Engineering and paid Rs.700/- as Application Form fee and Rs.10,000/- as Provisional Registration Fee. They also admitted the writing of letter dated 2.9.2013 by the complainant for surrendering his admission on the ground that he got admission in B.A. LL.B. While denying the other allegations, made in the complaint, they pleaded that the complainant and the other students were granted admission and the classes were commenced on 1.8.2013. Information regarding commencement of session was given to the students, vide letter dated 22.7.2013 and also telephonically on 23.7.2013. However, when the complainant did not report for First Appeal No.578 of 2014. 4 classes, he was again given telephonic call on 7.8.2013, to which he responded that he would report within two-three days. The last date for filing Punjab Technical University online registration was 15.8.2013. He was also informed that in case the registration form was not submitted by him, his admission would be cancelled. The complainant reported on 12.8.2013 and filled in registration form and his registration was made on PTU online registration site. After his registration, he did not report in the class. So, a registered letter was issued to his parents on 26.8.2013 asking them to see HOD, as their ward had not reported in the Institute and otherwise his name would be struck off. Since the complainant left the course in the month of September 2013, so he was liable to pay the charges for two months i.e. August and September amounting to Rs.18,384/-, as per PTU and All India Council of Technical Education Rules but he deposited only Rs.10,000/-. In fact, nothing was due to the complainant as per rules of refund of PTU and AICTE. In this way, there was no question of suffering of any inconvenience or deficiency in service by him. Opposite party No.1 is an educational Institution and the dispute between the students and educational Institutions does not come within the purview of service. Therefore, the complaint before the District Forum is not maintainable. They prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with costs.
4. Both the sides produced evidence in support of their respective averments before the District Forum, which after going through the First Appeal No.578 of 2014. 5 same and hearing learned counsel on their behalf partly accepted the complaint, vide aforesaid order.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants/opposite parties, as no one appeared for the respondent/complainant at the time of arguments. We have also carefully gone through the records of the case.
6. According to the complainant himself, opposite parties are running an Institute; which is an educational Institution. The following short order was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2012(3) CPC 615 (P.T. Koshy & Anr. v. Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors.):-
"1. In view of the judgment of this Court in Maharshi Dayanand University vs. Surjeet Kaur 2010(11) SCC 159=2010(2) CPC 696 SC wherein this Court placing reliance on all earlier judgments has 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."
7. In view of that judgment, it is to be held that the appellants/opposite parties are not service providers and, as such, the complaint under the Act was not maintainable against them. First Appeal No.578 of 2014. 6
8. Accordingly the appeal is allowed, the order of the District Forum is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.
9. The sum of Rs.5,500/- deposited at the time of filing of the appeal along with interest which has accrued thereon, if any, shall be remitted by the registry to appellants/opposite parties by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days of the sending of certified copies of the order to the parties.
10. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.
(JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH) PRESIDENT (BALDEV SINGH SEKHON) MEMBER May 28, 2015 Bansal