Stop ads of fake varsities

Pushpa Girimaji

IN a bid to help students make the right choice in so far as selection of educational institutions are concerned, the Union Ministry of Human Resource Development has been asking all deemed universities as well as universities and their affiliated institutions to follow full disclosure norms and post all academic and infrastructure information on their websites. While this is most welcome, the interests of students and parents would be served even better if the ministry were to also set up a monitoring cell to weed out false and misleading advertisements issued by educational institutions.

Every year, at the beginning of the academic season, the University Grants Commission issues press releases warning students about fake universities and institutions that are not recognised, or are being run in contravention of UGC rules. Yet, students fall prey to advertisements issued by such universities and institutions and lose an academic year or two, and also considerable amounts of money paid towards fees.

So in order to fully protect students, the government needs to put a stop to such advertisements per se. In order to do that effectively, the ministry should have a monitoring cell with the power to issue orders for withdrawal of such advertisements and publication of corrective advertisements. Such corrective advertisements serve the dual purpose of completely exposing the wrong doer, while at the same time penalising him, as he has to pay for the advertisements admitting to the falsity of the earlier advertisement.

Under the Consumer Protection Act, for example, the courts can issue directions for such corrective advertisements. In order to drive home this point, let me quote an order of the Supreme Court delivered in February this year, pertaining to a misleading advertisement (Civil Appeal No 1135 of 2001, Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital vs Bhupesh Khurana and Others). The order has its origin in the advertisement issued by the Buddhist Mission Dental College and Hospital in 1993, inviting applications for admission to the degree course of bachelor of dental surgery.

The impression created by the advertisement was that it was affiliated to Magadh University and was recognised by the Dental Council of India. Both were, however, false. Since the college was not recognised, no examination was held at the end of the academic year, forcing 11students to file a class action suit before the court. The national consumer disputes redressal commission, in its order delivered in 2000, directed the college to refund the fees paid by the students at the time of admission along with 12 per cent interest, and also pay Rs 20,000 as compensation to each of the students to defray their academic expenses and loss of two valuable academic years.

The Supreme Court, before which both parties filed appeals, concluded that the national commission had rightly held that this was a case of total misrepresentation on the part of the institute and was, therefore, an unfair trade practice. Since the course offered by the college was neither affiliated nor recognised for imparting that education, it was also a case of deficiency in service. Observing that the institute had played with the careers of the students and virtually ruined them, resulting in the loss of two academic years, the apex court directed the institute to pay an additional compensation of Rs 1 lakh to each of the students (complainants), and also pay the cost of litigation quantified at Rs 1 lakh to each of them.

As far as the students' plea for refund of capitation fee was concerned, the Supreme Court held that in the absence of any receipt or proof (the students had alleged that the institute had received it in cash and refused to give the receipt despite repeated requests), it would be difficult to order its refund. In this case only 11 students had filed the case, but there could be many more victims who did not. Even those 11 students who won their case did so after 15 years and, as the Supreme Court observed, they can never get back the academic years lost.

If only the advertisement had been stopped right at the beginning and corrective advertisements issued, it could well have saved many students and parents from falling prey to the advertisement.

HOME