9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erintendent allotted to Rajesh Kumar Roll No.496A and this was communicated to the Board office at Patna. The result of Rajesh Kumar was not published in spite of several letters written by him and hence he had to re-appear in the Board Examination the following year, and thus he had to suffer a loss of one year allegedly due to the fault of the Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as the `Board'). The result of Roll No.496A was not declared and it is alleged that this was because Rajesh Kumar had been given another Roll number. Hence the complainant prayed for compensation from the District Consumer Forum. 4. In its written statement in reply the Board stated that the Consumer Forum had no jurisdiction in the matter as the complainant was not a consumer, as defined in Section 2(1)(d) of the Act. It was also alleged that on the application of the examinee the strong room was searched and it was found that the serial number of his answer book of Advanced Maths did not tally with the serial number in the attendance sheet. While the answer book of the student found in the strong room was bearing serial number 148774, the attendance sheet serial number was 148 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cludes, but not limited to, the provisions of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service; Section 2(g): `Deficiency' means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service. According to the definition of 'consumer' in Section 2(d) of the Act, a person who hires or avails of any services for a consideration, is a consumer. The following category of service-availors will not be consumers: (i) persons who avail any service for any commercial purpose; (ii) persons who avail any free service; and (iii) persons who avail any service under any contract of service. A consumer is entitled to file a complaint under the Act if t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igence, omission or deficiency, does not convert the Board into a service-provider for a consideration, nor convert the examinee into a consumer who can make a complaint under the Act. We are clearly of the view that the Board is not a `service provider' and a student who takes an examination is not a `consumer' and consequently, complaint under the Act will not be maintainable against the Board. 12. The learned counsel for the respondent placed considerable reliance on the decision of this Court in Lucknow Development Authority vs. M. K. Gupta [1994 (1) SCC 243] to contend that a statutory authority that offers any kind of service for which a fee is charged, will be amenable to the jurisdiction of the consumer fora. He relied upon the following passages from paras 4 and 6 in support of his contention : In absence of any indication, expressed or implied there is no reason to hold that authorities created by the Statute are beyond purview of the Act..... The legislative intention is thus clear to protect a consumer against services rendered even by statutory bodies. The test, therefore, is not if a person against whom complaint is made is a statutory body but whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... served : It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under consideration and treat it to be complete `law' declared by this Court. The judgment must be read as a whole and the observations from the judgment have to be considered in the light of the questions which were before this Court. A decision of this Court takes its colour from the questions involved in the case in which it is rendered and while applying the decision to a later case, the courts must carefully try to ascertain the true principle laid down by the decision of this Court and not to pick out words or sentences from the judgment, divorced from the context of the questions under consideration by this Court, to support their reasonings. It is also necessary to keep in mind the following principles laid down in Government of Karnataka Ors. vs. Gowramma Ors. (AIR 2008 SC 863) with reference to precedential value of decisions: Reliance on the decision without looking into the factual background of the case before it is clearly impermissible. A decision is a precedent on its own facts. Each case pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te, it may become necessary for judges to embark into lengthy discussions but the discussion is meant to explain and not to define. Judges interpret statutes, they do not interpret judgments. They interpret words of statutes; their words are not to be interpreted as statutes. The following words of Lord Denning in the matter of applying precedents have become locus classicus: Each case depends on its own facts and a close similarity between one case and another is not enough because even a single significant detail may alter the entire aspect, in deciding such cases. One should avoid the temptation to decide cases (as said by Cardozo) by matching the colour of one case against the colour of another. To decide therefore, on which side of the line a case falls, the broad resemblance to another case is not at all decisive. *** *** *** Precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice, but you must cut the dead wood and trim off the side branches else you will find yourself lost in thickets and branches. My plea is to keep the path to justice clear of obstructions which could impede it. 15. In Sarva Shramik Sanghatana (K.V), Mumbai vs. State of Mahar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
