IMPORTANT POINT
Educational Institutions - Educational Institutions, Vocational courses and activities undertaken during the process of pre-admission as well as post-admission and also imparting excursion tours, picnics, extra co-curricular activities, swimming, sport, etc. except Coaching Institutions, do not come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

ORDER

Delay condoned.

2. By means of the present Revision Petition, Ms. Amruta Bharati, the Original Complainant (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner), has approached this Commission, challenging the Order dated 31.07.2019, passed by the Odisha State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal No. 49 of 2008, whereby the Appeal, preferred by the Secretary, Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination, Opposite Party No.2 in the Complaint, (hereinafter referred to as Respondent No.1 herein), has been allowed and the Order dated 18.12.2007 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dhenkanal in Complaint Case No. 127 of 2007, preferred by the Petitioner herein, has been set aside. By the said Order, the District Commission had allowed the Complaint and issued certain directions to the Opposite Parties in the Complaint/Respondents herein.

3. I have heard Mr. Shakti K. Pattanaik, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, and gone through the Memo of Revision Petition as also the documents filed along with it, including the Orders passed by the Fora below.

4. The Petitioner was a Student in the Monfort School at Dhenkanal, Opposite Party No.1 in the Complaint and Respondent No.2 herein, and had completed Class-X. Out of 700 marks, she had secured 614 marks but she was unable to know the marks secured in the theory papers and the marks secured in the internal assessment separately. The father of the Petitioner filed an RTI Application before the authority concerned, seeking to know the subject-wise marks in the internal assessment but information was not provided to him on the pretext of confidential information. Further, the Father of the Petitioner applied for rechecking of the English Paper but Xerox copy of the answer sheet was not provided to him and it was stated by Respondent No.1 herein that the result published earlier was correct and final. Accordingly, the Petitioner filed the afore-noted Complaint before the District Commission, which allowed the Complaint and issued the directions to the Opposite Parties in the Complaint/Respondents herein, to disclose the internal assessment marks and theory marks separately to the Petitioner and supply the Xerox copy of the answer sheet of the English Paper as also other subjects and pay certain amounts for compensation and litigation costs. However, in the Appeal, the State Commission set aside the Order passed by the District Commission. Hence, the present Revision Petition by the Petitioner.

5. A Larger Bench of Three Members of this Commission in the Case of Manu Solanki and Others Vs. Vinayak Mission University and other connected cases, 1(2020) CPJ, 2010, has held that the Educational Institutions, Vocational courses and activities undertaken during the process of pre-admission as well as post-admission and also imparting excursion tours, picnics, extra co-curricular activities, swimming, sport, etc. except Coaching Institutions, do not come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The principle laid down in the Case of Manu Solanki and Others Vs. Vinayak Mission University and other connected cases (Supra) is squarely applicable to the Case in hand. Relevant portion of the said Order is reproduced below for ready reference:—

“37. The following legal issues arise from the submissions made by the rival parties and the aforenoted decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court:—

• Would any defects/ deficiency/ unfair trade practice indulged by the Educational Institutions post admission, which does not fall within the ‘course of imparting knowledge’ till the degree is conferred, falls within the ambit of the definition of Education?

• If we apply the definition of Education, imparting knowledge for full potential, will that criterion apply to the admission stage, when the foundation for admission itself is deficient?

• Would preferential activities for extracur