SC agrees to examine whether education is service within Consumer Protection Act
The top court was hearing an appeal challenging an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which said education do not fall within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act.
Press Trust of India | November 3, 2021 | 01:25 PM IST
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has agreed to examine the issue whether education is a service within the Consumer Protection Act. A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and B V Nagarathna noted that a similar legal issue is pending adjudication in another case and tagged the matter along with it.
"Having regard to the pendency of Civil Appeal No 3504 of 2020 (Manu Solanki and Others vs Vinayaka Mission University), the issue as to whether education is a service within the Consumer Protection Act, is pending before this Court. Leave granted. Tag with Civil Appeal," the bench said in its October 29 order.
The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by Lucknow resident challenging an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which said educational institutions do not fall within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and education which includes co-curricular activities such as swimming, is not a “service” within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Also read | JNU VC has no authority to appoint chairpersons: Delhi HC bars them from taking decisions
In this case, the man's son was studying at a school which offered various 'Summer Camp' activities in 2007 including swimming, and invited students to participate by paying Rs 1,000. On May 28, 2007 at about 9.30 am, he received an urgent call from the school requesting him to come immediately as his son was unwell.
Upon reaching the school, the man was informed that his son had been taken to hospital as he had drowned in the school's swimming pool. He then rushed to the hospital where he learnt that his son was brought dead. Thereafter, he filed a consumer complaint in the State Commission alleging negligence and deficiency in service on part of the School and claimed Rs 20 lakh as compensation for the death of his son as well as Rs 2 lakh on account of mental agony suffered by him and Rs 55,000 towards the cost of litigation.
The State Commission dismissed the complaint on the ground that the complainant is not a consumer. This order was challenged in NCDRC. The NCDRC held that education which includes co-curricular activities such as swimming, is not a “service” within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It concurred with the State Commission's view that the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint not being covered under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not maintainable.
Follow us for the latest education news on colleges and universities, admission, courses, exams, research, education policies, study abroad and more..
To get in touch, write to us at news@careers360.com.
Next Story
]Featured News
]- NCTE to relaunch 1-year B.Ed, M.Ed with NTA-run admission test; drafts rules on syllabus
- ‘Used like guinea pigs’: Sarvodaya Vidyalaya parents want IB syllabus withdrawn, write to LG
- NCH relaxes teacher norms for PG departments in homeopathy colleges
- IIT Kanpur Suicide: No TA-duty for PhDs, review of labs, investigation – students make 11 demands
- ‘Beyond Kota and IIT exams’: Student suicides have more than board exams, academic pressure behind them
- NITI Aayog suggests HEFA-like agencies, fee hike, self-financed courses for state universities
- Education Loan: Over 50,000 NPAs in credit guarantee scheme, but repayment rate encouraging, says minister
- Zero Samagra Shiksha funds to Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu: Government
- Agriculture courses in Maharashtra see 8% uptick in UG admissions, but job prospects remain grim
- KFRI team discovers fungus that harms flowering plant, honours DDU Gorakhpur professor in name