Holding the New Delhi Institute of Management Studies (NDIMS) responsible for misleading a student by offering a master of business administration (MBA) course outside the territorial jurisdiction of a university, the national consumer disputes redressal commission (NCDRC) directed NDIMS to refund Rs1.55 lakh and pay Rs35,000 compensation and Rs10,000 litigation cost to a student.
In
an order, the NCDRC bench of Dr Inder Jit Singh (presiding member) says, "We are of the considered view that complainant was misled to believe that NDIMS centre is authorised to conduct MBA course on behalf of Madurai Kamaraj University (MKU) at its off-campus outside the territorial jurisdiction of MKU. Hence, this amounts to a deficiency in service on the part of NDIMS. Here, the issue is not with regard to the quality or contents of education imparted but with respect to the unfair trade practice on the part of NDIMS to mislead the students like the complainant in question to believe as if it was an authorised off-campus centre of MKU to impart regular MBA degrees. Hence, the complainant is covered under the definition of consumer under the Consumer Act, and NDIMS is liable for deficiency in service."
Mr Shamaneshwaram from Patna wanted to take admission to an MBA course. NDIMS and its admission-in-charge officer told him that they offer a two-year regular MBA course in association with MKU, and the course is approved by the University Grants Commission (UGC). Mr Shamaneshwaram took admission for the MBA course but was not provided job training during the course.
When he filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the UGC informed him that Madurai Kamaraj University is not authorised to open a study centre or off-campus centre beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu.
Mr Shamaneshwaram then filed a complaint before the Patna district consumer disputes redressal forum. While allowing the appeal, the district forum directed NDIMS to refund Rs1.55 lakh, the fee deposited by the student for the first year and pay Rs25,000 as compensation and litigation costs.
Aggrieved by the district forum order, Mr Shamaneshwaram and NDIMS filed an appeal before the Bihar state consumer disputes redressal commission. While upholding the order passed by the district forum, the state commission enhanced the compensation to Rs35,000 instead of Rs25,000 and directed NDIMS to also pay a litigation cost of Rs10,000 to Mr Shamaneshwaram.
In the order, the state commission says, "We do not find any material on record to support the stand of the institute (NDIMS) that the MBA course in question had the approval of the UGC vide letter dated 6 December 2007 is letter according to the permission to the institute. The primary question is that the course in question must be approved by UGC and no such approval letter have been brought on record by NDIMS."
However, not satisfied with the order, Mr Shamaneshwaram and NDIMS filed revision petitions before NCDRC. During the hearing, NDIMS submitted a letter it received from Madurai Kamaraj University conveying the permission to function as a learning centre to offer an MBA (industry integrated) course for the academic year 2008-09.
The bench of Dr Singh observed that NDIMS has given the impression to Mr Shamaneshwaram, the student, that it is an off-campus centre of MKU to conduct an MBA course.
However, in the RTI reply, UGC informed Mr Shamaneshwaram that MKU has been established by an Act of the state legislature of Tamil Nadu as a state university and is empowered to award degrees as specified under Section 22 of the UGC Act through its main campus with the approval of statutory councils.
NCDRC noted that based on the reply from UGC, it is clear that MKU is not authorised to open study centres or off-campus centres beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu. MKU can award regular MBA degrees only to those students who pursue their MBA degrees at its main campus in regular mode.
While dismissing the revision petition filed by NDIMS, the bench of Dr Singh says the state commission has awarded a fair amount of compensation and litigation cost and no further enhancement in this regard is required.
(Revision Petition Nos 346-347/2082 of 2019 Date: 23 July 2024)
