The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), led by Dr. Inder Jit Singh (Presiding Member), found the New Delhi Institute of Management Studies (NDIMS) responsible for inadequate service and unfair trade practices for misleading a student into enrolling in its MBA program by falsely claiming it was offered in collaboration with Madhuraj Kamraj University.
Summary of the Case:
The complainant alleged that NDIMS and its admissions officer incorrectly represented that the MBA program was a standard two-year course affiliated with Madhuraj Kamraj University and approved by the University Grants Commission (UGC). Believing this information, the complainant enrolled but did not receive the promised job training. An RTI inquiry revealed that Madhuraj Kamraj University was not authorized to operate an off-campus study center outside its state jurisdiction. Dissatisfied, the complainant filed a case with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna. The District Commission ordered NDIMS to refund the first-year fee of Rs. 1,55,000/- and awarded Rs. 25,000/- for compensation and legal expenses. Both parties appealed to the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, which dismissed NDIMS’s appeal and partially upheld the complainant’s appeal, increasing compensation to Rs. 35,000/- and awarding an additional Rs. 10,000/- for legal costs.
NDIMS then filed a revision petition with the NCDRC, arguing that educational institutions are not covered under the Consumer Protection Act and claiming that the District and State Commissions lacked jurisdiction and misinterpreted the approval letter from the complainant.
NCDRC Observations:
The NCDRC reviewed the District Commission’s findings, noting that the complainant was misled into believing that NDIMS had UGC approval for the MBA course. A UGC letter dated 12.08.2009 confirmed that Madhuraj Kamraj University did not have authorization to run distance education programs outside its state jurisdiction without UGC approval. The State Commission, which upheld the District Commission’s ruling, found no evidence to support NDIMS’s claim of UGC approval for the MBA program.
The NCDRC concluded that NDIMS’s misrepresentation constituted a deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. It confirmed that the complainant qualified as a ‘consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act. Consequently, the NCDRC upheld the State Commission’s decision and dismissed NDIMS’s appeal, affirming the compensation awarded by the District and State Commissions.
Posted and reproduced in Public Interest by
Adv. Sulaiman Bhimani Legal Consultant
Expert in RERA & Consumer Matters, Co-operative Scty Matters,
Deem Conveyance, Family Matters, and Property Disputes.
Human and Civil Rights Campaigner
President Citizens Justice Forum https://citizensjusticeforum.in
YouTube Channel https://tinyurl.com/CitizensJusticeForum
NEW CHANNEL FOR STOCK MARKET https://tinyurl.com/GreenWallet
WhatsApp +91 99877 43676