The Central Consumer Protection Authority (“CCPA”) has issued a final order imposing a monetary penalty of ₹15,00,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakh only) upon Vajirao and Reddy Institute for publishing misleading advertisements in connection with the Union Public Service Commission Civil Services Examination (“CSE”), 2023. The Authority concluded that the Institute had deliberately suppressed material particulars in its advertisements, specifically the precise course(s) undertaken by the successful candidates whose names and images were prominently displayed.
Immediately following the declaration of the CSE 2023 results on 16.04.2024, the Institute published the following claims on its official website, alongside the names and photographs of candidates who had qualified:
-
“Over 645 Selections Out of 1016 Vacancies in UPSC CSE 2023 From Vajirao & Reddy Institute”
-
“6 in Top 10 AIR”
-
“35 in Top 50 AIR”
-
“64 in Top 100 AIR”
Simultaneously, the Institute advertised a range of courses offered by it, including the GS/Complete Course/Foundation Course, Pre-Foundation Course, Weekend Course, Optional Subject Course, and GS Pre-cum-Mains Course. The CCPA observed that the juxtaposition of the above claims with advertisements for its regular classroom programmes created a representation that all successful candidates had enrolled in, and benefited from, these comprehensive courses.
Concealment of Material Information and Violation of Consumer Rights
The Authority observed that the determination of what constitutes “material” or “important” information in an advertisement must be assessed from the standpoint of a reasonable consumer, and necessarily varies depending upon the factual matrix of each case. In the present matter, the specific course opted for by a successful candidate was held to be material information for an aspirant preparing for the Civil Services Examination.
The non-disclosure of such information had the effect of creating a misleading impression that the successful candidates were trained by the Institute throughout all stages of the examination—namely, the Preliminary, Mains, and Interview stages—when, in fact, such representation was not substantiated by the record. The omission of this crucial detail materially impaired the ability of prospective aspirants to evaluate the scope, efficacy, and quality of the Institute’s services.
The CCPA held that such deliberate suppression of material facts adversely affects the consumer’s right to make an informed choice regarding enrolment and stage-specific preparation. The omission amounted to concealment within the meaning of Section 2(9) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, thereby constituting a violation of statutory consumer rights.
Discrepancies in Enrolment Documentation
In the course of proceedings, the Authority scrutinized the enrolment forms of the successful candidates produced by the Institute. It was found that 431 enrolment forms failed to specify the course(s) in which the concerned candidates had enrolled. Additionally, these forms did not record the date of enrolment. Upon being called upon to clarify these discrepancies, the Institute failed to furnish any satisfactory explanation. It also did not produce corroborative documentary evidence, including fee receipts or other contemporaneous records, to substantiate its assertions.
The absence of complete enrolment particulars and supporting documentation raised serious concerns regarding the authenticity and veracity of the claims made in the advertisements vis-à-vis the documents submitted before the Authority.
With respect to the remaining enrolment forms that did specify course names, a substantial number reflected enrolment only in the “Interview Guidance Programme” or “Mock Interview” module. As per the Institute’s own submissions, these candidates had enrolled exclusively for interview-stage guidance, which is conducted after clearing the Preliminary and Mains examinations. This indicates that such candidates had independently qualified through the earlier stages of the examination and had approached the Institute solely for limited assistance at the final stage.
In these circumstances, the advertisement created a misleading impression as to the extent and nature of academic services actually rendered by the Institute to the successful candidates.
Repeat Contravention and Enhanced Penalty
The CCPA further took note of the fact that the Institute had previously been proceeded against for publishing misleading advertisements concerning the CSE 2022 results, pursuant to which a penalty of ₹7,00,000 had been imposed. Despite prior regulatory intervention and caution, the Institute continued to disseminate substantially similar claims in relation to CSE 2023, evidencing a pattern of non-compliance and lack of due diligence.
In view of the recurring nature of the contravention, the present violation was treated as a subsequent offence, warranting the imposition of an enhanced penalty in furtherance of consumer protection objectives.
The Authority also recorded that approximately 11,00,000 candidates apply for the Civil Services Examination annually, underscoring the vast consumer base potentially influenced by such representations. Aspirants and their families invest considerable time, effort, and financial resources in preparation for competitive examinations of this magnitude. Any deliberate concealment or misrepresentation in advertisements, particularly those relating to success rates and rank claims, has the propensity to create false expectations and materially distort consumer decision-making.
Accordingly, the CCPA concluded that the impugned advertisements were misleading in nature and imposed the aforesaid penalty to safeguard the rights and interests of consumers.
