Date of filing : 29-01-2013
Date of order : 28-01-2016
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.48/2013
Dated this, the 28th day of January 2016
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
Shafeeque Ali, S/o.Abdul Khader, : Complainant
Hidayath Manzil, Mangalpady.Po,
Kasaragod Taluk
(Adv Farzana.T.P, Kasaragod)
1 Ashraf, Brilliance College and Computer Institute, : Opposite parties
Akshya Centre, Bandiyod, Mangalpady.Po,
Kasaragod Taluk.
(Adv.Manikandhan Nambiar.K, Kasaragod)
2 The Regional Director, IGNOU Regional Centre,
RC code ie, Madhavi Building, Nut street. Po,
Vatakara, Kerala, 673 104
(Adv. O.K.Kunhikrishnan, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL, MEMBER
The gist of the complainant’s case is that the complainant intended to join for B.Com correspondence course in Indira Gandhi Open University and approached the opposite party No.1 herein for the registration. He has also paid Rs.390/- as the examination fee with the opposite party No 1 on 7-3-2012 and received a receipt for the same. But the opposite party No.1 did not transfer the said amount to the university. The opposite party No.2 herein was subsequently impleaded that is the IGNOU Regional Centre. The complainant further submitted since he did not receive the study materials from the university and when he contacted them and at that time it was informed that he was not paid the exam fee and not eligible to write the exam. The complainant approached the opposite party to enquire about the same and by that time opposite party No.1 apologized for his mistake and promise that he will pay the exam fee with fine and to make arrangements for appearing the examination. But the opposite party failed to pay the fee again and the complainant approached him to enquire it. By the time the first opposite party demanded Rs.3000/- as the penalty exam fee and also insulted him in filthy language. The complainant lost one academic year and had mental agony due to the deficiency in service and negligence on the part of opposite party No.1. Hence the complaint.
2. The first opposite party was appeared and filed version by contending that IGNOU registration through Akshaya centre is being done as per the contract between the Akshya Project Officer and IGNOU. It is admitted in the version that the complainant registered for the course on 28-11-2011 a student could appear for the first year examination only after the lapse of 11 months after registration. In every year IGNOU conducting examination twice i.e. in the month of June and December. The opposite party No.1 further contended that he could not supply study materials because all the formalities in academic activities are being conducted by IGNOU i.e. opposite party No.2 herein directly. The first opposite party has no role in this activities. The opposite party No.1 also opposed that the allegation that the complainant entrusted Rs.390/- towards the examination fee but opposite party failed to forward the same to the second opposite party herein. The main contention of opposite party No.1 was that the complainant failed to submit examination form along with examination fees and he promised that the filled examination form will be submitted to them soon. But thereafter the complainant never approached. Opposite party No.1 repeatedly telephoned the complainant and at last on 12-12-2012 the complainant handed over the filled up examination form but by the time the time to apply for December examination 2012 was already over. Hence there is no question of loss of one academic year for the complainant due to the act of this opposite party. Therefore opposite party No.1 is not liable to compensate any loss as alleged in the complaint and therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. 2nd opposite party also appeared and filed detailed version. In the version they contended that IGNOU offers various academic programmes through distance mode. For providing effective students support services to its learners, the university operates through different study centers and examination scheduled to be held in the month of June and December every year. Examination Registration fee of Rs.60/- per course is charged from those who submits the form in time. Otherwise learners had to pay penalty of Rs.500/- for certain periods and Rs. 1000/- at last in addition to the examination fees. In the present case opposite party No.2 in its memorandum of understanding, MOU signed with Kerala IT Mission. Which is an autonomous body, to operates the IGNOU programme and provide support service through opposite party No.1 under the total control of Kerala IT Mission. As per the role and responsibilities of MOU the academic support is to be provided by the Kerala IT Mission and IGNOU has to assure the timely support of study material to Kerala IT Mission study centre. As per the clause 3 of MOU clearly speaks about responsibility of IGNOU KSITM i.e. support to KSITM on academic level support for the promotion of the academic programme, timely support of study material, support of CDs and other electronic components to the academic study centre, implementing the IGNOU academic program through Akshaya Kendra opposite party No.1 herein, coordination implementation process, assure necessary administration/proper documentation, assure proper monitoring of the programme and at last coordinate all financial dealings to GNOU from the study centre/Akshaya centre. From the above it is evident that the responsibility of IGNOU was confined to support KSITM on academic level study materials, promotion and advertisement and the whole implantation responsibility was with opposite party No.1. Moreover, opposite party No.2 alleged that they are unnecessarily impleaded as party and prayed for a dismissal of the complaint with cost.
4. Based on the pleadings and contentions of the parties the following points arose for consideration.
1 Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2 If so, what is the relief and cost?
The complainant in this case filed proof affidavit in lieu of his chief examination and produced Exts A1 to A5. The opposite party represented that he has no oral evidence to adduce and Exts B1 to B4 were marked. Heard the counsel for both parties in detail perused the documents carefully and analized the evidence before the Forum.
5. Point No.1. The complainant’s case is that for the purpose of joining for B.Com correspondence course with opposite party No.2 approached the opposite party No.2 herein for the registration. He sought admission by paying an amount of Rs.1700/- and an acknowledgement card for the receipt of admission ticket was issued in favour of the complainant by opposite party No.2 is marked as Ext.A3 through opposite party No.1 on 29-11-2011. The complainant also paid Rs.390/- as the examination fee with the opposite party on 7-3-2012 and opposite party No.1 issued a receipt for the same which is marked as Ext.A1. The specific case of the complainant was that the first opposite party failed to transfer the amount to the university i.e opposite party No.2. He also contended that he has not received books and study materials from the university. When he enquired about the same which was informed that the amount which he had already paid to the opposite party No.1 herein is not yet received by opposite partyNo.2 and hence he not eligible for to appear for the examination. At this juncture it is highly relevant to scrutinize the documents produced by opposite party No.2 herein which is the MOU executed between opposite party No.2 and Kerala State IT Mission i.e. opposite party No.1 herein which is marked as Ext.B4 before the Forum. As per Ext.B4 the main roles and responsibilities of Kerala State IT Mission was specifically mentioned as
KSITM will implement the IGNOU academic programmes as per IGNOU norms.
KSITM implement the IGNOU academic programme through the 3000+Akshya
e-Kendra in the state.
KSITM coordinates the implementation process of the IGNOU academic
programmes through their Akshaya district offices.
KSITM do necessary promotional activities for the IGNOU academic
programme through the Akshaya e-Kendra
KSITM assures to maintain the academic quality of the IGNOU academic
programmes in the Akshaya e-Kendra.
KSITM assures necessary administration/proper documentation support
to the IGNOU academic programme implemented the Akshya e-Kendra
KSITM assures proper monitoring of the programmes in field through the
Akshya e-Kendra district offices.
KSITM assures to coordinate all financial dealings to IGNOU from the
study centres/akshaya e-Kendra.
6. The Ext.B4 is also specifies the roles and responsibilities of IGNOU that is opposite party No.2 it only assures support to opposite party No.1 on academic level it further assures timely support of study material to opposite party No.1 study centre. According to Ext.B4 the complete implementation of IGNOU course will be coordinated by KSMIT i.e. opposite party No.1 and also made it crystal clear that the coordination by KSITM is the collection of course fee in favour of IGNOU along with application form at district level, as per the norms of IGNOU from the study centers in district. And the cost sharing between opposite party No.2 is the ratio of 30:70 of the total fee collected that means on perusal of the MOU itself it clear that it is the bounden duty on the part of opposite party No.1 herein has to collect the course fee in favour of opposite party No.2 along with application form. That is the responsibility on the part of opposite party No.1 when the complainant approached him by giving an amount of Rs,.390/- as examination fee without giving application form to him on 13-7-2012. The opposite party No.1 admits the Ext.A1 but the only contention was that PW1 herein failed to submits the filled application form along with the examination fee is only a lame excuse on their part since it was their duty to demand for the application without simply accepting the fees from the complainant. The opposite party No.2 herein getting only 30% fee paid by the complaint. Forum is surprise to see that without taking the application form how the opposite party No.1 can accept the examination fee when it was their duty to accept both fees and application form at a time when its specified in the MOU. This amounts to gross negligence on their part. Moreover the opposite party No.1 alleged that it is not their duty to supply the study materials to the complainant. But as per B4 it is the roles and responsibilities of KSITM is that the implementation process of IGNOU academic programmes through their Akshaya district offices and also specifically mentioned in the roles and responsibilities of IGNOU that is to assure timely support of study material to KSITM study centres. Here the fact is that as per the MOU the first opposite party has to supply all the study materials to the complainant. Apart from all these negligence on the side of opposite party No.1 they have taken a strong contention that eventhough the opposite party No.1 called upon the complainant many times he failed to appear before them and submitted application in time. But it is highly pertinent note that they have not produced any evidence such as any intimation letter or records such as call history or any acknowledgement to prove that they have contacted PW1. Apart from all these things the opposite party not entered into box to depose such things before the Forum to substantiate his case. Considering all the aspects it is crystal clear that Pw1 lost his one academic year due to the negligence of opposite party No.1 which amounts to gross deficiency in service.
7. Point No.2. Since already the complainant proved his case beyond doubt he is entitled for a relief from the opposite party No.1. The complainant is not seeking any relief against opposite party No.2. Moreover the forum also could not find out any latches on the part of opposite party No.2.
In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party No.1 to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and also directed to pay an amount of Rs.3000/- as cost. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.17-3-2012 Payment receipt for an amount of Rs.390/-
A2. 30-01-2012 Fee receipt
A3. IGNOU Acknowledgement card
A4. 14-12-2012 Copy of lawyer notice.
A5. Postal acknowledgement card
B1.Copy of Exam Form
B2. Copy of Hall ticket
B3.2-1-2013 Copy of Lawyer notice.
B4. Copy of Memorandum of Understanding herein referred to as MOU
PW1.Shafeeque.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
Pj/
