FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT

SHRI SWAPAN KUMAR MAHANTY, PRESIDENT

Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present complaint are that the complainant received an information through email dated 02.08.2018 from OP 1 to the effect from a job opening is in favour of the complainant as Chartered Structural Engineer (London) in an overseas assignment. Complainant registered his name with the OP 1 on 04.08.2018. OP 1 and Mr. Arghoy Sarkar, Director of OP 2 arrange an interview with Panas Group. Complainant appeared in the interview and Panas Group suggested him to undertake training of behavior skills and he registered his name against payment of registration fees of Rs. 260/-. Complainant time to time deposited Rs. 1,08,588/- to the OP 1 for training programme and spend 306 hours training. Despite training and appreciated score, the OPs did not provide any employment to the complainant as a Chartered Structural Engineer (London). Thus, the complainant requested the OPs to refund the amount paid by him along with compensation without any delay. Complainant has already passed the test as prescribed by the OPs. Pre-employment verification of the complainant was done but till date nothing has been happened and the complainant submitted representation to the authorities of CIS and Panas Group as well as OPs but no fruitful result is forthcoming. Demand notice dated 01.09.2020 send to the OPs but such notice was unattended. The OPs did not fulfill their liabilities and harassing the complainant. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the OPs, the complainant approached this commission.

Despite service of notice upon both the OPs, they did not turn up to contest the case by filing WV within the specified period as prescribed under the CP Act, 2019. Thus, the case runs ex-parte against both the OPs.

Complainant Dr. Amar Nath Neogi has filed evidence supported by an affidavit and also relied the documents annexed with the complaint petition. We have heard argument on merit and have also perused the record.

The fact that the complainant has paid Rs. 1,08,588/- to the OPs for registration and training fees against money receipts for getting a job as Chartered Structural Engineer (London) in an overseas assignment. Complainant participated in a training programme and appeared before the interview board with Panas Group. Complainant participated 306 hours training programme and on completion of training he was not provided employment as Chartered Structural Engineer (London). In spite of demand, the OPs did not refund the deposited amount. Complainant claims refund of deposited amount of Rs. 1,08,588/- including loss of professional activities of 306 hours and legal expenses. Complainant paid Rs. 1,08,588/- to the OPs against money receipts. Thus, the complainant is a Consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Despite completion of training programme, the OPs failed to provide any job to the complainant as Chartered Structural Engineer (London). OPs have4 filed to file their WV within the prescribed period of 45 days. There is also no evidence on the part of the OPs to rebut the evidence of the complainant. Thus, the allegation made out in the complaint petition is deemed to be correct.

The light of the above discussion, we find, both, deficiency in service within the meaning of section 2 (11) and unfair trade practice within the meaning of section 2 (47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to be well and truly evident on the part of the OPs.

In remedy, it would be just and equitable to direct the OPs to refund Rs. 1,08,588/- (Rupees one lac eight thousand five hundred eighty eight) only to the complainant which incurred for the purpose of registration and training fees. OPs are also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only as mental agony to the complainant together with litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with a period of 90 days from today, failing which the amount shall carry interest  at the rate of 6  percentp.a. till its realization.

Thus, the Consumer Complaint is allowed ex-parte against the OPs.

Copy of the judgment be supplied to the parties as per rules. Upload the judgment on the website of this Commission for perusal of the parties.