Dhananjay Jog
All of us have childhood dreams when we start understanding life, usually between the ages of 9 and 12. As for me, when I first saw a train and travelled in it, I decided I wanted to be an engine driver, impressed by the sheer size of this mode of transport and the amount of steam and noise it produced. The train whistle, in the steam engines of that time, was created by pulling down a wire that allowed steam to escape through a small nozzle. Of course, later, when I travelled by air to Mumbai (there was only one flight per day back then, and only to Mumbai), I switched my loyalties and aspired to become a pilot.
Many readers may have gone through this phase. As we reached our teenage years and adulthood, our dreams often evolved into more realistic ambitions. Some even managed to persevere. That’s how we ended up with a capable pilot who later became the youngest ever Prime Minister of the country. Ashok Keni (name changed) was one of those who still dreamed of flying airplanes at the age of 18. When he later personally appeared before us to file and fight his case, we saw a tall, physically fit young man. He shared that this passion for flying had been with him since childhood. During school, he had collected various aviation-related souvenirs, including toy models of different aircraft. Importantly, his parents fully supported him.
So why was he before the Consumer Commission? Here’s the story: After completing his higher secondary studies in science, Keni, with his father’s help, located a suitable training academy, ‘Douglas Flying School’ in Maharashtra. Contact was established, brochures were received, and emails were exchanged. The fee structure and other course details were provided in a detailed manner, specifying charges per flying hour for different types of aircraft. The reader will know that aircraft come in various sizes, defined by the number of engines and seating capacities.
After studying various options, Keni enrolled in the CPL (Commercial Pilot License) training course, which included 200 flying hours—185 hours on single-engine planes and 15 hours on multi-engine planes. The entire training was to be completed in 18 months. Keni’s father paid approximately Rs. 15 lakhs for the course, which was supposed to lead to the desired qualification and a flying career.
Unfortunately, Keni’s experience with the course was far from satisfactory. While the course was supposed to offer 200 flying hours over 18 months, the school repeatedly postponed flying sessions for various reasons. Keni soon realised that years of his life were being wasted. By the end of 18 months, Keni had completed only 33 hours of flying instead of the promised 200. A call from the academy could come at any time, and when it did, he had to be ready to travel for a lesson the next day. With so few flying hours completed, he couldn’t afford to miss an opportunity by saying, “I can’t make it tomorrow.” This meant he had to stay available and couldn’t focus on other studies or work activities. Despite his repeated requests to the school to speed up the lessons, nothing changed.
By this point, Keni was already 20. Given the slow pace of the course (33 flying hours in 1½ years), it would take another 7½ years to complete the training. There was much deliberation at home, and advice was sought from well-wishers. If 7½ more years were spent merely obtaining a flying license, how could he expect to find employment afterward? Airline companies typically recruit pilots at a young age when reflexes are sharp. After experiencing the disorganisation and unprofessionalism of the course, Keni and his father sent a letter to the school, stating their intention to terminate the contract. After repeated phone calls and emails, about three months later, the school offered a refund of Rs. 8.5 lakhs and transferred Rs. 1 lakh as part payment. However, the remaining Rs. 7.5 lakhs was never refunded.
Keni then sent a legal notice to the school, which went unanswered. This led him to appear before the Consumer Commission, seeking the balance Rs. 7.5 lakhs and compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs for the wasted time, which had affected his future career prospects.
Although the school received notice, no representative or advocate appeared before us, nor was there any reply, affidavit, or argument submitted. As the reader is aware, in such situations, the absent party is marked ‘ex-parte’, and the case proceeds without it. Therefore, the Commission only examined the written and oral submissions of Keni.
While ‘education’ is generally not considered a ‘service’ under the Consumer Protection Act, as it pertains to the quality of teaching, Keni’s complaint was about the school’s failure to provide the 200 flying hours as promised. The Commission, drawing from the Anand Institute of International Studies v. Sani Jaggi and others case, ruled it had the authority to hear the case. In that precedent, the National Commission awarded compensation for unfair trade practices and deficient service. Similarly, the school in Keni’s case provided only one-sixth of the promised flying hours, likely to save on costly aircraft time and maintenance.
The Commission ultimately concluded that Keni had proven his case, supported by documents including proof-of-payment receipts. The Douglas Flying School did not appear to challenge Keni’s submissions, so there was no reason to disbelieve him. The Commission ordered the school to pay Keni Rs. 7.5 lakhs with interest from the date of his last payment. Also, Keni was awarded Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation and Rs. 10,000 towards costs.
(If you have any questions, comments, or if you are a consumer seeking assistance, please feel free to email me at danjog@yahoo.com)
