DEPUTY REGISTRAR COLLEGES Vs. RUCHIKA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the outset, we would make it clear that on several occasions the Apex Court has deprecated the practice of permitting the students to pursue their studies and/or to appear in the examination under the interim orders (fiat as observed by the Apex Court) passed in the petitions which were filed before the High Court/Courts. If the High Court is not permitted to pass such orders, it is to be held without any hesitation or reservation that Consumer Fora have no jurisdiction to pass such orders.

(2.) HENCE , we hereby direct that in future no such interim order permitting the students either to pursue the study or to appear in the examination, shall be passed by the Consumer Fora. That is not the function of the Consumer Fora and, hence, granting of such interim orders would amount to misconduct.

(3.) IN the case of State of Tamil Nadu vs. St. Joseph Teacher's Training Institute (1991) 3 SCC 87 the Supreme Court observed that the direction of admitting the students of unauthorized educational institutions and permitting them to appear at the examination has been looked on with disfavour and the students of unrecognized institutions who are not legally entitled to appear at the examination conducted by the Educational Department of the Government cannot be allowed to sit at the examination and the High Court committed an error in granting permission to such students to appear at the public examination. In the case of Central Board of Secondary Education vs. Nikhil Gulati (1998) 3 SCC 5, the Apex Court deprecated the practice followed by the High Court to issue direction and also observed that such aberrations should not be treated as a precedent in future.