CCPA Imposes ₹3 Lakh Penalty on IITian’s Prashikshan Kendra Pvt. Ltd. for Misleading Advertisements
The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has taken strict action against IITian’s Prashikshan Kendra Pvt. Ltd. (IITPK) for making deceptive claims about IIT-JEE results. The regulatory body has imposed a penalty of ₹3 lakh on the coaching institute for misleading advertisements that falsely portrayed student rankings.
CCPA’s Action Against Misleading Advertisements
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, prohibits any form of misleading or false advertisements that can misguide consumers. In line with this, the CCPA, led by Chief Commissioner Smt. Nidhi Khare and Commissioner Shri Anupam Mishra, issued an order against IITPK for violating these provisions.
This action is part of a larger crackdown by CCPA, which has issued 46 notices to different coaching institutes for similar violations. So far, penalties amounting to ₹77.60 lakh have been imposed on 24 institutes, with directives to immediately stop misleading advertisements.
False Claims About Student Ranks
IITPK’s advertisements prominently displayed titles such as “IIT Topper” and “NEET Topper” alongside large numerical ranks like ‘1’ and ‘2’, along with student names and photos. This created a deceptive impression that these students had secured All India Ranks in competitive exams like IIT-JEE and NEET.
However, investigations revealed that the students mentioned were merely top scorers within the coaching institute itself, not national-level rank holders. This deliberate omission misled potential students and parents into believing that IITPK consistently produced national toppers.
Impact of Misleading Advertising on Students
Misrepresentation of rankings can have a significant influence on students and their families, especially those in classes 7th to 12th (aged 14-17 years) who aspire to excel in competitive exams. Such misleading claims can create false expectations, leading students to choose coaching institutes under incorrect assumptions.
By imposing a fine on IITPK, the CCPA has reinforced the importance of truthful advertising in the education sector. Coaching institutes must ensure that their promotional materials reflect authentic and verifiable achievements rather than misleading potential students with exaggerated claims.
Conclusion
The penalty imposed on IITPK highlights the CCPA’s commitment to protecting consumers—in this case, students and their parents—from deceptive marketing tactics. This move serves as a warning to other coaching institutes engaging in similar practices to maintain transparency and adhere to ethical advertising norms.
As the education sector continues to grow, such regulatory measures will play a crucial role in ensuring fair competition and consumer trust in the coaching industry.
