Imparting education for a consideration is a service within the meaning of Clause (o) of Sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Mr. Justice S.S. Sandhawalia, President — Whether the imparting of education for a consideration is a service” within the meaning of Clause (o) of Sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Act? This is the significant threshold question in this appeal.

2. The appellants A.P.J. School, Faridabad assail the majority order of the two learned Members of the District Forum against them, whilst the President of the District Forum has held in their favour by observing that no interim relief in the process of admission to the school can be granted. The respondent Dr. K.B. Galhotra’s son Ankur Galhotra was a student of the appellant school right from the Nursery upto the 10th standard. He took the Central Board Secondary Education examination in March/April, 1992 and secured an aggregate of 71.4% only. His percentage of science mathematics and English was however, assessed higher at 79.3%. Thereafter he applied afresh for admission in the medical group of the 11th standard in the school and submitted his form in time. However, the Selection Committee rejected his application on merits. Subsequent thereto, it is the case of the complainant that he contacted the school authorities for admission and even offered to shift his son to the non-medical side, if it was not possible to admit him in the medical group. The appellants after consideration however, refused any further redress. It was suggested on behalf of the complainant that some students both originally belonging to the school and outsiders were granted admission though they had a lower percentage of marks.

3. On notice being issued the complaint was resolutely defended by the appellants. The firm preliminary objection taken was that the dispute was not covered under the Consumer Protection Act and the complainant being not a consumer had no locus-standi to agitate the issue, apart from alleging that no cause of action was either made out. It was also the stand that the matter in dispute involved complicated questions of law and fact which cannot be determined by the District Forum.

4. On merits whilst admitting the broad factual ground of the complainant’s son having been a student who had been refused fresh admission after he passed out in the C.B.S. Examination, the burden of the defence was that Ankur Galhotra had applied for getting admission in the Medical Course only. It was the stand that his percentage in that particular course was much lower than the students admitted in the said medical course by the school on the relevant date of the admission. The complainant was accordingly told that his son did not come in the merit list prepared by the school for medical course and consequently, he cannot be accommodated therein. It is repeatedly affirmed that the complainant had sought admission for his son in the medical course only and had never opted for a non-medical course. Indeed, he had insisted that he should be given admission in that branch alone. All other allegations of any impoliteness towards the complainant were strongly controverted. As a matter of law, the plea was that a former student of the school had no right to get automatic admission in the 11th class and there was no vested legal right, as such. The school being a private one not at all being aided by the State, the fresh admission in the 11th Class was entirely in the discretion of the management of the school and it cannot be compelled to admit a student in a particular class or in a particular course. All suggestions of any malafides on the part of the principal and the management of the school were frontally denied.

5. It would appear that after the filing of the aforesaid written statement and pending the adjudication of the case on merits, the complainant prayed for interim relief. The President of the Forum in a separate speaking order took the view that no such interim relief could be granted. However, the two other learned Members of the Forum forthwith allowed the complaint and granted the relief praye