BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA vs MAMTA

THE appellant is Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board and the respondent is Mamta. THE appeal is against an order dated 28.11.1996 passed by the District Forum, Motihari in Complaint Case No. 155 of 1993, whereby the District Forum had ordered the appellants to pay Rs. 25,000 as compensation and Rs. 1,000 as cost to the complainant for deficiency in service.

BRIEFLY the complaint was to the effect that after undergoing training between 1977-79 in the Primary Teachers Training College at Motihari, the complainant passed out in May, 1998. After more than year and a half the appellant-Board arranged an examination for appointment of teachers. The complainant took the examination, the results of which were published by the Board after another delay of one and a half years but her result was withheld on the ground that two of her answer books were not evaluated. As a result she could not take examination held in 1991, 1992 and 1993 for selection and appointment of teachers. Meanwhile she had also crossed the age limit fixed for appointment. Her result was ultimately given to her by the Board in October, 1993. Hence the complaint was filed. The orders of the District Forum indicates that the undue delay in publishing her results by the Board, deprived her from taking the examinations for appointment as teacher which amounted to a deficiency in service and hence the impugned orders were passed. This case was heard ex parte as the respondent filed attendance on 15.9.2005 and thereafter never appeared on any date.

The pleas in the appeal are as follows. That the Board is a statutory body established under the Act of 1952 and that the Board does not render any "Service" for "hire" as defined under the C.P. Act and education does not come under the C.P. Act. Further the complainant is not a "Consumer" under the C.P. Act and the complaint was not maintainable under the Consumer Forum.

WE have perused the records. The pleas stated above do not hold good any longer. There are several rulings of Hon''ble Courts, National Commission and State Commissions to establish negligence in evaluation of answer papers, unreasonable delay in publishing results, etc. are administrative aspects relating to Education and thus not excluded from the definition of "Service" under the C.P. Act, especially when fees are charged for holding the examination as consideration. Therefore, in the light of these rulings in the present case under consideration also, the complainant is a "Consumer" under the C.P. Act and the District Forum has clear jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of the complaint. The impugned order and the facts of the case clearly indicate that there was deficiency in service on the part of the officials of the Board beyond doubt. In such circumstances, we do not find any merit in the appeal to intervene in the impugned orders. In result, the appeal is dismissed and the impugned orders are sustained.

IN this connection we would like to make an observation that a large number of complaints of this nature come up before the Consumer Fora regarding delayed publications of results, non-evaluation of answer books for a long time, etc. There are clear examples of deficiency in service on the part of the Bihar School Examination Board, in spite of collecting fees as consideration money for conducting examinations and publishing results. This indeed a very unhappy situation and does not speak well of the working and functioning of the Board. Let the copy of this order be sent to the Secretary of the Govt. for perusal and rectify the situation. Appeal dismissed.