DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.484 of 01-11-2013

Decided on 18-03-2014

Parampal Kaur D/o Surinder Singh R/o # 16085, Main Street, National Colony, Behind Rose Garden, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

Aklia College of Education for Woman, Jaitu Road, Goniana Mandi (Bathinda), through its Principal.

.......Opposite party

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt.Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Lachhman Kumar, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite party: Sh.Sham Labhaya, counsel for the opposite party.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that she took admission in B.Ed course and deposited the amount of Rs.33,500/- with the opposite party vide receipt No.8937 dated 30.8.2013. Thereafter the complainant received a telephone call from Sh.Vanshidhar Computer Education, Air Force Station, Bhisiana for the job of computer lecturer, it was intimated to her that it is dispatching the appointment letter to her and told her to join the said job on dated 1.9.2013. The complainant immediately requested Ms.Arshdeep Kaur, Receipt Clerk of the opposite party to refund the fee, she took the complainant to Mr.Sukhwinder Singh, Lecturer of the opposite party, he asked her to move an application alongwith original receipt for the refund. The complainant immediately moved an application alongwith original receipt to Mr.Sukhwinder Singh, he promised her for the refund of the fee within a week. After one week, the complainant again approached Mr.Sukhwinder Singh, Lecturer of the opposite party, he asked her to meet the Principal of B.Ed Section of the opposite party. The complainant met the Principal, he told her that her application and receipt have been misplaced, on this she moved another application alongwith photostat copy of the receipt to the Principal of the B.Ed section, he promised her to refund the fees within the period of one week. The complainant has also handed over a photostat copy of her appointment letter issued by Sh.Vanshidhar Computer, Education, PTU Centre, near Bus Stand, Bathinda to the opposite party. The complainant met the principal on 25.9.2013, he told her that no such fee is lying deposited with the opposite party and refused to refund her fee. The complainant itself surrendered the seat on dated 30.8.2013 i.e. date on which she took admission in B.Ed course and there was/is no reason on the part of the opposite party to withheld the fees deposited by her. To support her version the complainant has referred various authorities. The complainant has also got issued a legal notice dated 7.10.2013 to the opposite party, but the opposite party has not given the reply to the said legal notice. Hence the present complaint filed by the complainant to seek the directions of this Forum to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.33,500/- after deducting Rs.1000/- being the processing/administrative charges alongwith interest from 30.8.2013, cost and compensation.

2. The opposite party after appearing before this Forum has filed its written statement and pleaded that the actual facts of the complaint are that Aklia College of Education for women is affiliated to Punjabi University, Patiala, it was appointed as competent authority to conduct the centralized online counselling for B.Ed course for the session 2013-14 in the college of education affiliated to Punjabi University, Patiala & Others as per the notification of the Government of Punjab department of Higher Education, Education-1, Branch No.14/18/2011-3Edu.1/55426 dated 23.5.2013. The last date for depositing of the fee has been declared as 25.7.2013 and even shifting of the students from one college to another was not allowed after 25.7.2013. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs.33,500/- on account of fee for B.Ed course vide receipt No.8937 on dated 25.7.2013 and not on 30.8.2013 as alleged by her. The date column of the receipt No.8937 was remained unfilled inadvertently by the cashier at the time of issuing of the receipt to the complainant on dated 25.7.2013. The complainant seems to have filled the date in column as 30.8.2013 afterwards, at her own. The classes of B.Ed were started on 16.8.2013 and there was no question of depositing of the fee after 25.7.2013.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. Admitted facts of the parties are that the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.33,500/- with the opposite party vide receipt No.8937 for the admission in B.Ed course.

5. The submission of the complainant is that after depositing of the fee with the opposite party, she received a telephone call from Sh.Vanshidhar Computer Education, Air Force Station, Bhisiana for the job of computer lecturer, it intimated her that it is dispatching the appointment letter to her and told her to join the job on 1.9.2013. The complainant was still in institute of the opposite party when she received the telephone call of her appointment. The complainant immediately requested Ms.Arshdeep Kaur, Receipt Clerk of the opposite party to refund the fee, she took the complainant to Mr.Sukhwinder Singh, Lecturer of the opposite party, he asked her to move an application alongwith original receipt for the refund and assured her that the fees would be refunded to her within a week. After one week, the complainant again approached Mr.Sukhwinder Singh, Lecturer of the opposite party, he asked her to meet the Principal of B.Ed Section, he conveyed her that she has to move another application for the refund of the fees and assured her that the fees would be refunded to her within the period of one week. Thereafter the complainant met the principal on 25.9.2013, he told her that no such fee is lying deposited with the opposite party. The complainant further submitted that she surrendered the seat on dated 30.8.2013 itself i.e. the date on which she took admission in B.Ed course and there was/is no reason on the part of the opposite party to withheld the fees deposited by her. At the maximum the opposite party can retain the amount of Rs.1000/- as processing/administrative charges and has to refund the remaining amount after deducting the amount of Rs.1000/-, but till date nothing has been refunded to her.

6. The submission of the opposite party is that the last date for depositing of the fee has been declared as 25.7.2013 and even shifting of the students from one college to other was not allowed after 25.7.2013. The complainant deposited the amount of Rs.33,500/- on account of fee for B.Ed course vide receipt No.8937 on dated 25.7.2013 and not on 30.8.2013 as alleged by her. The date column of the receipt No.8937 remained unfilled inadvertently by the cashier at the time of issuing of the receipt to the complainant on dated 25.7.2013. The complainant seems to have filled the date in column as 30.8.2013 afterwards, of her own. The classes of B.Ed were started on 16.8.2013 and there was no question of depositing of the fee after 25.7.2013.

7. The record placed on file shows that the complainant has deposited the fee of Rs.33,500/- vide receipt No.8937 dated 30.8.2013, Ex.C6. The complainant has moved an application for the refund of the fee to the opposite party as she has received the appointment letter from Vanshidhar Computer Education, Air Force Station, Bhisiana for the job of computer lecturer. To prove her version the complainant has placed on file the appointment letter, Ex.C4. The relevant portion of this appointment letter is reproduced:-

“I am pleased to confirm your acceptance of offer of employment with PTU centre as a computer lecturer in the department of computer. Your appointment will be effective on 1.9.2013.”

Thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party, but it refused to refund her fee. The complainant again moved an application on dated 13.9.2013 to the Principal of Aklia College, but till date nothing has been refunded to her. On the other hand as per the rules regarding the refund, Ex.OP1/2, 10% tuition fee be deducted or at the most Rs.1000/- be deducted, if any student leaves the seat and the vacant seat is filled by another candidate then proportionate amount be refunded to the candidate'. The opposite party has placed on file Ex.OP1/5, in which it has been mentioned at serial No.4 '…...Candidates shall deposit fee on 24 July, 2013 and 25, July, 2013 to claim for allocated seat The copy of the merit list and admitted candidates shall be sent to the University for its record and to display it on the website. The colleges can accept the fresh requests also on 26 July, 2013'.

8. The submission of the opposite party is that the receipt issued to the complainant does not bear the date as the column of the date inadvertently left unfilled by its cashier, to support its version the opposite party has placed on file Ex.OP1/6 and afterwards the complainant herself filled the date in it, whereas as per instructions of the Punjab University, Patiala, the last date of depositing of the fee was 24 July, 2013 and 25, July, 2013. As per the version of the opposite party the complainant has deposited the fee prior to 30.8.2013, whereas the receipt placed on file by the complainant issued by the opposite party shows that it has been issued on 30.8.2013, meaning thereby the complainant has deposited the fee on 30.8.2013 with the opposite party. The opposite party has not placed on file any evidence to prove that when other candidates have deposited the fee, no list alongwith date of such candidates have been placed on file. Moreover no other leaf of the same receipt book is placed on file by the opposite party to prove that when the fees was deposited by the other candidates and when receipts of payment were issued. The opposite party has relied upon the refund policy vide Ex.OP1/2, but has not placed on file any document to show that how many seats were allotted to its college, how many seats were filled and how many seats remained vacant till the request of the surrender of the seat by the complainant, thus this falsifies the version of the opposite party that the complainant herself has filled the date in the receipt, whereas the record placed on file shows that the fee was deposited by the complainant on dated 30.8.2013 and she received the call on the same day for her appointment as lecturer. Hence the complainant is entitled for the refund of the fees deposited by her.

9. Therefore in view of what has been discussed above there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint is accepted with Rs.5000/- as cost and compensation against the opposite party. The opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.32,500/- (Rs.33,500/- - Rs.1000/-=Rs.32,500/-) to the complainant.

10. The compliance of this order be done within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

11. In case of non-compliance the interest @ 9% per annum will yield on the amount of Rs.32,500/- since its deposit till realization.

12. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

18-03-2014

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member

(Jarnail Singh)

Member