In a student-friendly order that would deter private colleges and institutes from running various courses 'at par with degree courses', the State Consumer Commission has asked an aircraft engineering institute to refund the fee of two candidates after they complained of the misrepresentation.
'There is nothing like 'at par' or 'similar'. Either it is a degree course or it is not. To assign such status to any course is highly misleading and unfair', said State Consumer Commission headed by Justice J D Kapoor in a recent order.
'The institutes, which represent that such courses are at par with a Bachelors' Degree or Masters' Degree, itself is an unfair trade practice and as such a representation has the element of misleading nature as to the need for or the usefulness of such a certificate', Justice Kapoor said.
Expressing concern on the dilemma and hardship being faced by students who enroll in the courses under the guise of 'at par' with the particular course, he observed 'this practice is detrimental to the future prospects of candidates as they expect a status similar to those passing out with recognised degree courses'.
"Such types of advertisements are nothing short of unfair trade practice and a sort of exploitation of the aspiring candidates," Kapoor stated, dismissing the appeal of Indian Institute of Aircraft Engineering based at Mahipalpur.
Refusing to buy the argument by the Institute that the course in question was patronised by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and recognised by UPSC and IIT, Kapoor said 'no government authority can issue any such notification for any private institute saying the course in question is at par with a degree course'.
Directing the Institute to refund to complainant Rs 1.42 lakh taken as fee for admission in a course which was later found to be 'at par' with Bachelor in Aeronautical Engineering, Kapoor said 'a mere mentioning of the claim in
the prospectus is self-defeating and squarely comes within the mischief of unfair trade practice'.
Meeta Sengupta, a resident of New Delhi, had sought refund of fee for her two daughters who were misrepresented
and misled while taking admission in a B Tech Degree course, which was later found not duly recognised as a degree course.
After the South-West District Forum held in August last year that the Institute was guilty of 'deficiency in service' and asked it to refund the fee charged from her, it chose to approach the State Consumer Commission, which dismissed its appeal holding 'such a practice amounts to unfair trade practice, too'.
© 2025