Remedies available under consumer protection Act for Use of electronic gadgets for unfairly accessing answer keys & Withdrawal of admission

 

Remedies available under consumer protection Act for Use of electronic gadgets for unfairly accessing answer keys & Withdrawal of admission

 

 

Tanvi Sarwal v. Central Board of Secondary Education 2015 SCC OnLine SC 539.

 

Facts: Amid allegations of large scale use of unfair means via electronic

gadgets thereby accessing the answer keys, the All India Pre-Medical Tests

(AIPMT) and Pre Dental Entrance Tests conducted by the Central Board of

Secondary Education (CBSE) on 03.05.2015, was cancelled and directed

the CBSE to hold fresh entrance test within four weeks from the date of this

judgment, keeping in mind the technicalities and the commencement of the

new academic session on 01.08.2015. The matter came into prominence

when a day after the exam, several newspapers reported that 90 answer keys had been transmitted to the candidates during the examination. Rampant use of latest technology (vests fitted with SIM cards) was done so as to facilitate the transmission. The Court took cognizance of the issue and

restrained any further steps regarding the examination process. Jaideep Gupta on behalf of the Petitioners contended that cancellation of AIPMT-2015 is the only solution to restore the faith of the candidates in the existing system of examination, as the investigations reveal the involvement of a countrywide network. However Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the CBSE argued that the Board took all the necessary precautions while conducting the entrance tests, therefore they should not be held liable for any lapse whatsoever.

issue : Whether there was a deficiency in service by Central Board of

Secondary Education in conducting examinations?

Decision: The Division Bench of R.K Agarwal and Amitav Roy, JJ., cancelled the All India Pre-Medical Tests (AIPMT) and Pre-Dental Entrance Tests conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education. The Bench

meticulously perused the status reports filed by the investigation authorities

and the evidences procured by them. It was observed that the investigations

indeed reveal a deep rooted conspiracy to aid the beneficiary candidates

with answer keys so as to help them solve the question paper. The Court

further observed that in view of a countrywide network operation, it is

plausible that many more beneficiaries are revealed in near future; therefore

segregation of the identified beneficiaries is not a solution for the present

issue. Keeping in mind the amount of inconvenience that would be caused

to the candidates and the Board alike by re-conducting the exam, the Court

concluded that AIPMT- 2015 has been stripped of its sanctity, therefore it

had to be necessarily annulled.

 

Withdrawal of admission

Controller, Vinayak Mission Den. Col. and Anr. v. Geetika Khare

109 (2010) 12 SCC 215.

 

Facts: The Complainant had secured admission to a BDS college but had to

withdraw from the same on account of lack of recognition of the said college

and also other deficiencies, which not only caused inconvenience and mental

harassment but also resulted in the loss of an academic year.

Issue: Whether the compensation is paid despite of refunding the admission

fees?

Decision: The Supreme Court held that the refund of fee made by the

University “met the ends of justice” and there was no requirement for any

further compensation to the Complainant. The court should have dealt with

the case in a more strict sense. Duping students by opening unrecognised

universities and playing with their careers should be dealt with in a very

strict manner and exemplary damages should have been awarded.