Jago Grahak Jago

Edit Template

February 2026

Education or Exploitation: The Dark Side of Borderless Classrooms

In the mid‑2010s, India’s edtech sector was hailed as the great equalizer. Platforms like upGrad reportedly promised prestigious global degrees, “guaranteed” placements, and Ivy League‑level education at a fraction of the cost. Marketed as “borderless classrooms,” they were said to offer students in Tier‑3 towns or busy professionals in Bangalore opportunities they could otherwise never afford. The pitch was irresistible. For a few lakhs, one could earn a “Global MBA” or “Data Science Certification” from universities abroad. India’s middle class, hungry for upward mobility, embraced edtech as a passport to global careers. Glossy ads, celebrity endorsements, and bold claims were said to have fuelled the dream. But beneath the slick marketing lay troubling realities: opaque refund policies, reportedly exaggerated placement promises, and degrees that allegedly carried less weight than advertised. Voices of Discontent The most powerful indictment comes not from analysts or regulators, but from students themselves. Their stories reportedly reveal how lofty promises unravelled into debt, disappointment, and disillusionment. 1. Ansar Basha Lavangiri – From Consumer to Defendant In 2023, Ansar enrolled in a hybrid MSBA program marketed with AACSB accreditation, live classes, and “100% placement assistance.” Instead, he reportedly faced recorded lectures, minimal peer interaction, and failed loan applications due to unclear accreditation. Out of 19 students, only one secured a visa. When he raised the issue of misleading ads and false promises with consumer forums and ASCI, instead of resolving the matter, upGrad allegedly sued him in the Delhi High Court, escalating his hardship. His case is said to highlight how a genuine consumer grievance can spiral into litigation. 2. Abhishek Dixit – Misled by False UGC Approval Claims Abhishek, a licensed aircraft engineer, invested over ₹5 lakh in upGrad’s Global MBA program with Deakin University after being reportedly assured it was UGC‑approved and valid in India. He expected career advancement but soon discovered the degree lacked recognition, rendering it ineffective for professional growth. Promised mentorship and small‑batch learning allegedly never materialized, leaving him disillusioned. Multiple students in his cohort reportedly raised similar concerns. 3. Naseer Ahmad Hurrah – Broken Refund Promise Naseer, an insurance underwriter from Kashmir, paid ₹2.75 lakh for an MBA program after being reportedly assured a full refund if loan facilitation failed. Despite repeated applications through upGrad and partners, his loans were rejected due to undisclosed restrictions linked to his location. For nearly two years, he pursued refunds, but upGrad allegedly refused repayment, offering only evasive responses. 4. Avinash Bharadhvaz Pakala – Exam Bans and Academic Mismanagement Avinash joined an MBA program advertised with “100% placement assistance,” assured interviews, and high salaries. Instead, he reportedly faced poorly conducted classes, delayed results, and arbitrary accusations of cheating. Students were banned from exams for months without evidence, delaying thesis eligibility and forcing paid extensions. Placement support was negligible, and refund requests were allegedly denied. 5. Unni Chandran – Finland MBA Pathway Collapse Unni invested heavily in upGrad’s Finland MBA pathway, resigning from his job and rejecting a lucrative offer based on promises of visa approval and refunds. He paid over ₹8 lakh in tuition, insurance, and travel costs, only to face visa rejection. Despite assurances of full refunds, upGrad allegedly refused compensation, leaving him unemployed and in debt. 6. Bhumika Suresh Sunkad – Abandoned Abroad Bhumika relocated to Germany for a hybrid Master’s program marketed with live classes, visa guidance, and strong placement prospects. After paying over ₹10 lakh, she found classes replaced with recordings and support reportedly withdrawn once visa crises emerged. Declared “on‑campus,” she was left stranded without assistance. 7. Balija Akshaya & Killada Sravan Kumar – Debt and Harassment A young couple, Akshaya and Sravan Kumar, enrolled in an MBA pathway program with promises of easy loans, live classes, and assured placements. Instead, they received pre‑recorded content, shifting requirements, and rejected loans. Unable to pay EMIs, they allegedly faced relentless harassment from recovery agents, legal notices, and public shaming. Lessons Learned: Safeguards for Students and Reforms for EdTech Credibility & Quality: Degrees without recognition or poor delivery reportedly erode trust and careers. Financial Safeguards: Opaque refund policies and misleading loan promises are said to trap students in debt. Global Pathway Honesty: Visa outcomes cannot be guaranteed, yet many programs allegedly marketed “zero rejection risk.” Consumer Protection & Student Vigilance: Grievances often reportedly spiralled into silence, evasive responses, or lawsuits. Education or Exploitation? The EdTech Crossroads The case studies of Ansar, Abhishek, Naseer, Avinash, Unni, Bhumika, Balija and others are not isolated anecdotes. They are seen by some observers as emblematic of a larger crisis in India’s edtech sector — a crisis where glossy promises collide with opaque contracts, where consumer grievances spiral into litigation, and where careers are reportedly derailed by misrepresentation and neglect. The lessons learned — credibility and quality, financial safeguards, global pathway honesty, and consumer protection — are not abstract reforms. They are urgent safeguards. Without them, education risks being reduced to a commodity, stripped of trust and social purpose. India’s edtech sector now stands at a crossroads. It can continue commodifying education, eroding trust, and betraying students, or embrace transparency, accountability, and pedagogy. The choice will determine whether the dream of accessible global education survives — or becomes another cautionary tale of boom and bust. “Education is not a consumer product; it is a social contract.” Affidavit – Ansar Basha Lavangiri Affidavit – Abhishek Dixit Affidavit – Naseer Ahmad Hurrah Affidavit – Avinash Bharadhvaz Pakala Affidavit – Unni Chandran Affidavit – Bhumika Suresh Sunkad Affidavit – Balija Akshaya & Killada Sravan Kumar To UpGrad: Request for Clarification on Student Grievances and Allegations UpGrad Reply: Request for Clarification on Student Grievances and Allegations Disclaimer: This article is published in good faith, in the larger public interest, and without any malafide intention against any individual or organization. The contents herein are based on information reportedly shared by affected students, consumer forums, and publicly available sources. They are presented as fair comment on matters of public concern, with the sole objective of seeking transparency, accountability, and regulatory safeguards in the

Education or Exploitation: The Dark Side of Borderless Classrooms Read More »

Why Health Insurance Claims Are Rejected

“You think you’re covered — wait until your insurer says no.” Health insurance is sold as a risk cover and a safety net, but for countless policyholders the real shock comes not from the illness, but from the rejection letter of the health insurance company. In India, insurers proudly advertise claim settlement ratios above 90%, which is Rs 1.89 Crores claims settled through Cashless mode for an amount of Rs. 62537 Crores, 58% by volume and 66% by value are settled by Cashless mode. This was reported in the year 2024-25, the insurance companies have settled 3.26 Crore Claims for an amount of Rs. 94248 Crores. Yet I have observed thousands of families land up with shock after their claims are rejected. The truth is sobering: most denials aren’t random. They stem from avoidable mistakes, overlooked fine print, or procedural lapses. Quick Facts  Claim Settlement Ratio (India, 2024): ~93% Average Claim Size: ₹1.5–2 lakh Ombudsman Relief Rate: ~40% in favour of policyholders Top 3 rejection causes: Non‑disclosure, waiting period, documentation errors The most recent development is our traditional healthcare treatments, which is also covered under the health insurance coverage, without any exclusion and treatment parity. Today Ayush treatment is at par with Allopathy treatment in India, which is an unique feature in our country. Of course, the awareness about such facilities are lacking and the Ministry of Ayush, Government of India has established a Helpline 1800110008 to facilitate the Ayush Hospitals and patients to derive all the benefits, without any discrimination. Let me share with you the most common reasons behind claim rejection — and illustrating them with real‑world examples — policyholders can learn how to protect themselves and ensure their coverage works when it matters most. 10 Common Pitfalls & How to Avoid Them 1. Non‑Disclosure of Pre‑Existing Conditions Health insurance thrives on transparency. Yet one of the most common — and costly — mistakes policyholders make is failing to disclose pre‑existing medical conditions due to mis selling adopted by the agents. Concealing issues like diabetes, hypertension, or past surgeries may seem harmless at the time of purchase, but insurers treat it as misrepresentation. “What you hide today can come back to haunt you tomorrow.” Case in Point:  A 45‑year‑old in Delhi underwent bypass surgery. His claim was rejected outright when the insurer discovered he had not disclosed his long‑standing hypertension. The company argued the surgery was directly linked to the undisclosed condition. Lesson: Always disclose your medical history honestly, even if it means paying a higher premium. The short‑term cost is far better than the long‑term shock of a rejected claim. 2. Claims During Waiting Period Health insurance policies don’t always provide instant protection. Most impose waiting periods for certain illnesses, treatments, or pre‑existing conditions. Maternity benefits may require two to four years, while pre‑existing conditions often demand two to three years before coverage kicks in. “Buying late means waiting longer.” Case in Point:  A young couple in Lucknow filed a claim for maternity expenses within one year of purchasing their policy. The insurer rejected it, citing the two‑year waiting period clause. Lesson: Plan coverage early. Buy health insurance well before you anticipate medical needs, so the waiting clock runs out before you need to file a claim. 3. Treatment Not Covered (Policy Exclusions) Every health insurance policy comes with exclusions — treatments or conditions that simply aren’t covered. Cosmetic surgery, dental procedures, infertility treatments, and certain alternative therapies often fall outside the safety net. Many policyholders discover this only when their claim is denied. “The fine print decides your fate.” Case in Point:  A patient in Mumbai underwent bariatric surgery to address obesity. When he filed a claim, the insurer rejected it outright, pointing to the exclusion clause that ruled out weight‑loss procedures. Lesson: Never assume all treatments are covered. Read the exclusions carefully before purchase and consider add‑on riders if you anticipate specific medical needs. 4. Incomplete or Incorrect Documentation Health insurance claims live and die by paperwork. Hospital bills, discharge summaries, prescriptions, and diagnostic reports must all align perfectly. Even small errors — a misspelled name, mismatched dates, or missing signatures — can derail an otherwise genuine claim. “One wrong line on paper can cost lakhs.” Case in Point: A claim in Ghaziabad was rejected because the discharge summary listed the wrong patient’s name. Despite the treatment being genuine, the mismatch raised red flags and the insurer refused to settle. Lesson: Double‑check every document before submission. Keep both digital and physical copies and ensure hospital staff issue correctly filled records. Accuracy is your strongest ally in claim approval. 5. Delayed Intimation to Insurer Health insurance isn’t just about treatment — it’s about procedure. One of the most overlooked requirements is prompt intimation to the insurer or TPA. Most policies demand that hospitalization be reported within 24 hours. Delay in communication, even in genuine emergencies, can give insurers grounds to reject a claim. “A stitch in time – saves nine.” Case in Point: A family in Jaipur informed their insurer only after discharge. Despite the hospitalization being genuine, the claim was denied because the policy required intimation within 24 hours of admission. Lesson: Always notify your insurer or TPA immediately when hospitalization occurs. A quick phone call or online intimation can save you from unnecessary rejection. 6. Treatment at Non‑Network Hospitals Cashless claims are a major convenience — but they only work at hospitals within the insurer’s approved network. Opting for treatment at a non‑network hospital often means paying upfront and struggling later with reimbursement, which may be delayed or even denied. However, the insurance regulator IRDAI has now directed all the health insurance companies through a master circular that all claims need to be Cashless and approvals given within a stipulated time, which was missing earlier. Even non-network hospitals are bound to provide Cashless treatment for health insurance policy holders. To my surprise, data has revealed that 50% of the hospitals in our country do not want to entertain health insurance policyholders and are

Why Health Insurance Claims Are Rejected Read More »

INTERVIEW : ASOK KUMAR G

ASOK KUMAR G, IAS Retd Former Joint Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Govt of India, Former Chief Vigilance Officer, Airports Authority of India Mr Asok Kumar belongs to the 1991 batch IAS, Telangana Cadre. He retired as Special Secretary & Director General, National Mission for Clean Ganga. He has held several other important positions such as Additional Secretary and Mission Director, National Water Mission, Ministry of Jal Shakti; Director in the Ministry of Power, in GoI; Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Principal Secretary, Housing etc. in Govt of AP/Telangana. During his tenure in the Ministry of Civil Aviation, he set-up the Aircraft Accidents Investigation Bureau (AAIB). He was in the Board of Directors of Air India and Pawan Hans and also played a key role in drafting the National Civil Aviation Policy, reviving the then ailing airline industry and aviation in general. While in NWM, he started the successful water conservation campaign, 'Catch The Rain' and is popularly known as the 'Rain Man of India'. Q. Was the IndiGo meltdown an unforeseeable crisis or a result of regulatory gaps? I feel that it was indeed a preventable, foreseeable crisis which got amplified by regulatory and systemic gaps and over-confidence of the airlines concerned. When any system is stretched to its extreme limits, leaving no slack or buffer to absorb any unforeseen exigencies, it is bound to snap one day. Indigo's much touted super-efficient model with more than 100% utilization of its resources like (wo)men and material, without caring for their stress fatigue or rest, to achieve high-load factor and tight turnaround time was a ticking time-bomb bound to explode one day. Am quite surprised why DGCA, as a regulator, failed to see it coming, when the signs of the imminent shock were patent all over. December month of any year has fog issues in many cities, which can cause cancellations and disruptions in mornings, particularly in Delhi. A disruption in any sector from Delhi has a cascading effect on the entire day's schedule. Over ambitious, very tight schedules with no slack is a sure recipe for a potential disaster. (SpiceJet almost collapsed on 15 December 2014, but scraped through with a proactive MoCA's help.) Though the FDTL notification was issued many months ahead, it is difficult to understand why DGCA was not following up for its implementation. It should have insisted on an implementation action plan from airlines and monitored it. If monitored properly, it could have red flagged the slackness in its implementation. DGCA, like most of the regulators in India, preferred to have a reactive than a proactive, preventive oversight. They were also lulled into inaction by the big market dominance of Indigo and not-so effective or enforced consumer rights protection norms, poor consumer awareness and less powerful/active air traveller's forums. As a regulator, DGCA should use forward-looking resilience metrics like minimum spare aircraft ratios or crew reserve requirements for realistic slot allocations while approving new schedules, instead of blindly incentivizing any scheduled airlines' breakneck expansion plans, without providing for buffers to absorb any unexpected shocks. Leading airlines of the world generally build resilience into everyday operations – not just efficiency, while Indigo was, I would say, obsessed and prided on its lean inventory model. Their model stressed on maximum utilization of its resources for maximized efficiency for maximizing its profits, conscious of its dominance in the sector, leading to a why-we-care-for- customers attitude. There are many predictive analysis tools available, which can do what-if risk analysis to simulate situations arising from sudden shortage of aircraft or crew or other exigencies and help be ready with a Plan B to counter, whenever it happens. DGCA should use these technological solutions while approving tight schedules. DGCA should also keep consumer rights protection and basic facilities of the passengers in mind while dealing with the profit-motivated private aircraft and airport operators. The Indigo meltdown was due to a complex concoction of overzealous/over bearing/profit motive driven Indigo management and the patent regulatory gaps of DGCA, the regulator. Q. What lessons should non-aviation regulators – banking, insurance, food, telecom – take from the IndiGo episode? The IndiGo episode offers many lessons to regulators in sectors like banking, insurance, food, telecom, power etc. Any model that stresses on overstretched efficiency, without buffers or slackness to absorb shocks, is prone to crash some time. Indigo's model of ultra tight ambitious schedules and over 100% utilization of men and material resources to maximize profit worked most of the time, but when an unexpected stress came it, there was a complete meltdown. Regulators in telecom and power sector face this often. If the systems are designed to carry normal load only, when there is a sudden surge in demand, the systems collapse. In telecom sector, when there is greater need for bandwidth availability, say at times of national emergency or disaster or when results of popular exams come out, etc., we have experienced severe disruptions. In power sector, in peak winter or summer, spikes in power requirement have led to disruptions. Regulators in the food sector should ensure adequate buffer in local warehouses to handle unexpected demand surges due to national calamities or war or logistic shocks like disruption in movement. Just-in-time inventory management is good for maximizing the profits, but can cause catastrophes in an event of disruption. The crisis during Covid period or during natural disasters or the 26/11 attack are some examples. Supply chain crisis can lead to economic downfall or even regime changes, as we are seeing now. Regulators in insurance and banking sectors have to be aware of the need of buffer liquidity availability to help out during disaster periods. Remember the disruptions during the notebandi due inadequate stocks in ATMs. Q. We should appreciate that adequate buffer is an insurance not inefficiency! Sometimes, firms can be legally compliant, but operationally brittle. For example, in banking sector, banks may be meeting capital ratios but may have concentrated funding sources or non-diverse exposures to spread the risks which can cause

INTERVIEW : ASOK KUMAR G Read More »