Commission orders school to pay 10 lakhs to parents for kid’s death

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission recently made a significant judgment ordering a school in Meerut, UP to pay a compensation of Rs 10 lakh to the parents of 16-year-old student who had died after suffering an asthma attack while appearing for an examination in 2003saying that schools are supposed to act and behave like parents with students. The panel said it was gross negligence on the part of the school. The carelessness and apathy that the school officials have shown, leaves no doubt about their negligence in taking care of the minor child and providing even the basic aid and assistance which every school is expected to provide to its students who are in distress. In fact, the school officials are expected to act and behave like the parents of the child in such an emergency. The commission said that valuable time was lost on account of school officials waiting for family members of the child to arrive along with their doctor. It further added that instead of waiting for the family members, they ought to have immediately taken him to the nearest doctor or the hospital. On reaching the hospital or the clinic they could have intimated the family members who could have taken over the child from there. It was further held, the fact that the child did not carry an inhaler despite being asthmatic would not absolve the school officials from the gross negligence displayed. The family claimed it was informed by one of the students of the school and not the school officials. The child's father Krishnan Goyal filed an appeal before the commission last year. He was aggrieved after the state commission lowered the district forum compensation of Rs 10 lakh to 5 lakh. He further said that the school was attached to a local hospital and the principal was informed about Rishab's condition and his need for special care. On March 21, 2003, Rishab suffered the attack and was allegedly taken to the residence of the principal who expressed his inability to help him as no medical facility was available in the school. Goyal said that one of the students's informed the family about his condition. Rishab's sister rushed to the school and took him to the hospital where he was declared dead. But the school denied these allegations saying the sister arrived at the school with a homeopathic doctor and later took him to an allopathic doctor. The school management denied any negligence on their part. They also objected that a student cannot be said to be a consumer as defined in the Consumer Protection Act and therefore a consumer complaint was not maintainable. Refuting the arguments, the commission however pointed out that besides the fees, the school was also charging an additional annual amount of Rs 850. & quot The annual charges would constitute the consideration which the opposite parties were receiving from the students, in addition to the charges being recovered under the nomenclature 'school fee'. In fact, even the school fee would be sufficient consideration for providing the basic aid and assistance which a student in distress can expect from his educational institution,& quot the commission said.

The commission has rightly held that the duty of the educational institution like school is more than just imparting education. On an average a child spends around 7 to 8 hours in the school and it is quite natural that he may suffer an attack or any kind of medical instability at any point of time. It is wholesome responsibility of the school to attend the student at such crisis.