Back
2022 Supreme(SC) 606
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.
HCMI Education – Appellant
Versus
Narendra Pal Singh – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2481 of 2016
Decided On : 11-07-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Awanish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shiv Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Chandrashekhar Chakalabbi, Adv. Mr. Anshul Rai, Adv. Mr. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vinayakam Gupta, Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari, AOR
For the Respondent: Mrs. Shiel Sethi, AOR
IMPORTANT POINT
Policy decision of a foreign country cannot be questioned before Consumer Forum.
Headnote:
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 23[Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 67] – Education – Admission in Foreign College – Abolition of MBBS Programme by Republic of Philippines – Complaint allowed by Fora below – Students were offered to continue with alternative course which appellant has not chosen – Appellant is only a facilitator and it has no control over decision of Republic of Philippines – Appellant cannot be considered to be a part of Republic of Philippines or Office of CHED for policy decision changes made, which was made not pertaining to a single institution, but whole Republic – Role of appellant stops with admission being secured, which it did – Policy decision of Republic of Philippines cannot be questioned before Consumer Forum – Impugned orders set aside and complaint dismissed. (Paras 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14)
Facts of the case:
Respondent approached appellant for seeking admission in Philippines to the Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) course. Accordingly, an admission was secured with M/s Emilio Aguinaldo (College) for the academic year 2007-2008. Fees were paid by respondent through the appellant. By the resolution dated 22.09.2008, Republic of Philippines approved to abolish the MBBS programme from the School Year (S.Y.) 2008-2009 making it applicable to the students who got admitted for the year 2007-2008. An alternative course was offered and MBBS students were re-directed to the BS Biology, which appellant refused. All Fora below, including the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission rejected appellant’s response and accordingly it was asked to pay a sum of $12000, apart from compensation and costs.
Findings of Court:
Respondent did complete one year. At the time of admission and continuation in the year 2007-2008 there was no problem with MBBS course. It was only in pursuance to the decision made by Republic of Philippines, students were offered to continue with alternative course, which the appellant has not chosen whatsoever. This is an aspect that Fora have failed to take note of in the correct perspective.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
M.M. SUNDRESH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 28.06.2022, there was no representation on behalf of the respondent. So, after hearing the counsel for the appellant, we adjourned the matter to 01.07.2022 in order to extend an opportunity to the respondent. As we find the same situation continues to prevail by the absence of the respondent, we are inclined to dispose of this appeal upon once again hearing counsel for the appellant.
FACTS IN BRIEF:
2. The respondent before us approached the appellant for seeking admission in Philippines to the Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) course. Accordingly, an admission was secured with M/s Emilio Aguinaldo (for short ‘College’) for the academic year 2007-2008. Fees were paid by the respondent through the appellant. The appellant gave sufficient indication that it was acting on behalf of not only the College, but also the Government vide an advertisement by inviting Respondent through Pamphlet, Brochure supplied accordingly:
“(a) The Republic of Philippines and the Commission on Higher Education has appointed Healthcare Management International (HCMI) as their sole authorized representative of India.
(b) HCMI Mission is to provide students with an opportunity to attain quality education overseas by introducing them to reputable universities, thus, allowing them to make apt choices. HCMI do this by partnering with reputable universities that deliver relevant, up-to-date knowledge.
(c) Access to quality medical education.
(d) Information packages on courses and fee structures.
(e) Guidance for loans through trusted banks, if required.
(f) Information on eligibility requirements.
(g) Guidance in processing student visa.
(h) Counselling in making an apt decision.
(i) Step by step guidance through the application process.”
3. The respondent joined the College upon receiving the offer letter dated 31.08.2007. Vide Resolution No. 583 of 2007 of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the College got the application for approval to offer MBBS programme effective from 2007-2008.
4. The respondent joined the College, which was arrayed as respondent No. 2, and set ex-parte before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, U.T. Chandigarh. By the resolution dated 22.09.2008, the Republic of Philippines approved to abolish the MBBS programme from the School Year (S.Y.) 2008-2009 making it applicable to the students who got admitted for the year 2007-2008. The following is the resolution passed:
Republic of the Philippines
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION
EXCERPTS FROM THE MINUTES OF 321TH REGULAR
COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2008
AT HEDC CONFERENCE ROOM, HEDC BUILDING,
C.P. GARCIA AVE. U.P. DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY
RESOLUTION NO. 491 - 2008
“WHEREAS Republic Act No. 2382 otherwise known as the medical Act of 1959 prescribes among other things the minimum required curriculum for the degree Doctor of Medicine (MD) which is a bachelors degree in science or arts.
WHEREAS, the primary medical degree to practice medicine in the Philippines is the degree Doctor of Medicine (MD).
WHEREAS, the Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) is a medical degree offered in countries like Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, which requires completion of Grade XI and XII as minimum requirement for entry into this program.
WHEREAS, a number of medical schools in the Philippines have offered the MBBS program in spite of the absence of a CHED Memorandum Order prescribing the curriculum of such program.
WHEREAS, the offering of such degree without the corresponding CHED-approved curriculum has led to concern and confusion regarding the capability to practice medicine in the Philippines and abroad.
WHEREFORE, upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, the Commission En Banc adopted to resolve as follows:
RESOLVE, AS IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the abolition of Bach
