Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
66 lines (35 loc) · 7.85 KB

to-sue-or-not-to-sue-injurious-educational-institutes.md

File metadata and controls

66 lines (35 loc) · 7.85 KB

To Sue or Not To Sue Injurious Educational Institutes

Copyright: 2025 | Sameer A. Khan | All rights reserved.

The Indian Supreme Court's judgment in the case of "P.T. Koshy & Anr. v. Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors." impacting the Consumer Rights of all persons who have paid and are paying for educational courses at any Indian institute, essentially stated that, "educational institutes do not provide a service to any Consumers because education is not a commodity."

Here is my critique of that statement and judgment order...

Of course, education is not a commodity, the same way nutrition is not a commodity.1

However, there exists a process of transferring edible products and foods, or potable beverages, with "nutritional content or palpable material" from a worker to a person who has paid for it, so that, as the buyer, the person receiving nutritional content and materials (especially in the form of prepared foods or beverages) can gain sustenance, and also improve their physical and emotional state of being, through consumption of the justly and fairly rendered content and materials.

  • Such a tokenized and quantifiable process of transferring nutritional content from a vendor to a buyer is a service within itself, and it is the basis of the "food and beverages industry." For emphasis, it is reiterated, though nutrition is not a commodity, the process of transferring palpable and potable items with nutritional content from designated workers to Consumers is a quantitative and qualitative service.

Similarly, there exists a process of imparting Intellectual Properties (IP) from a worker who has it in the form of "educational content or study material", to a person who has paid for it, so that, as the buyer, the person receiving educational content and materials (especially in the form of composed items, or advise or consultation), can gain skills, and also improve their knowledge base along with a potential towards gaining livelihood, through consumption of the justly and fairly rendered content and materials.

  • Such a tokenized and quantifiable process of transferring educational content from a vendor to a buyer is a service within itself, and is the basis of the "education industry." For emphasis, it is reiterated, though education is not a commodity, the process of imparting IP with educational content from designated workers to Consumers is a quantitative and qualitative service.

So, if an educational institute, especially a Central University in India, were to claim that there is no educational content or value adding utility within the work outputs being delivered to buyers of the institute's IP, by its employed or hired or contracted workers, then the institute will simply loose and forfeit the entire commercial value of all of its hard earned IP.

A loss and forfeiture of IP belonging to an educational institute such as a school or a college or a university, that has any commercial value, includes the institute's branding, logo, and flagship colors that are integral to advertising and marketing the educational services being offered to Consumers (of educational or licensed content and materials), by the educational institute.

Of course, there are many more types of services that schools, colleges, and universities provide to various categories of persons affiliated with those institutes, such as: certifying the competency levels of graduates, providing housing and shelter through physical spaces and buildings, imparting socio-economic goods and financial securities, assurances of healthcare benefits and safety, rendering environmental services involving cleanliness and sanitation, job placement services, licensing services, and so many, so many more types of services to Consumers who utilize the commercial activities and functions of schools, colleges, and universities.

The word "service" occurs 36 times within the Central Universities Act, 2009, Amended up to 2024. It does so, mostly in the context of "conditions of service" of employees such as teachers, non-teaching staff, and officers belonging to the Central Universities. The legislative statute that effectively governs the creation and operations of all Central Universities in India, has no other word or concept, other than the word and concept called "service", to define what the workers in a university can or ought to do, on a daily basis. As per this statute, the objects of a Central University "shall be to disseminate and advance knowledge by providing instructional and research facilities" which, is obviously a service.

Furthermore, all forms of professional advise and consultation, are rendered by trained workers of an institute using a communicative process-driven service, to purchasers and Consumers of the marketed and advertised forms of advice sold by institutes.

Injuries and damages caused by any of those services obtained from an educational institute or an educational organization, to paying customers or clients, is certainly a legal matter that can be adjudicated by a Court of Law or a Judicial Body, depending on the nature and severity of the harm done by the institute's activities, and also depending on the type of error that caused identifiable harm to Citizens, Residents, or Consumers.

Any form of "disservice" committed by Central Universities or other educational institutes, can be and must be recognized by the Indian Judicial System as offenses committed against the paying Consumers or non-paying bystanders, who suffer negative impacts from the untoward or defective services of an educational institute.

Therefore, it can be noted that, the Judgment Order in the matter of P.T. Koshy & Anr. v. Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors. does not have support on legal and logical grounds.

Please see, "Persons can sue educational institutes under Consumer Protection Act"2 for an in-depth and thorough analysis of this subject matter.

In conclusion it can be said that, educational institutes can be sued by users and Consumers of an institute's range of commercial goods and services, as per the provisions of the Consumer Rights Protection Act, 2019, in the instances when the educational institutes have identifiable deficiencies or defects, especially injurious ones, within:

  1. the educational content and materials that those institutes have commercially advertised or imparted to any buyers or beneficiaries,

  2. the other goods and services rendered by the institute that can only be obtained by becoming a paying customer or a client of the institute, or by having any other exclusive relationship or association with the institute.


Footnotes

  1. In simple terms, the "sovereignty", "integrity", and "contiguity" across time and space, of a nation such as India, are not commodities. And yet, defense, intelligence, and security services are indeed services, that have been and are being pre-paid for, by the nation's Citizens and Residents, via taxes. Services and goods rendered by State and Central Governments such as that of the Indian Public Service Commission which includes the commissioned services rendered by Education Boards, have been and are being pre-paid for, by the public, via taxes. ↩

  2. "Can you sue educational institutes [in India] under Consumer Protection Act?", https://blog.ipleaders.in/can-sue-educational-institution-consumer-protection-act/ ↩