DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM NORTH-WEST,
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 469/2016
D.No._____________________ Dated: _________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
YASH AGGARWAL
S/o SH. MUKESH AGGARWAL,
R/o 2643/194 & 196,
TRI NAGAR, DELHI-110035 … COMPLAINANT
Versus
1. SH. BALWANT INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
ADMISSION OFFICE AT D-7,
PRASHANT VIHAR, NEAR SANTOM HOSPITAL,
OUTER RING ROAD, ROHINI DELHI-110085.
2. THE CHAIRMAN,
SH. BALWANT INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
MEERUT ROAD, SONEPAT, HARYANA. … OPPOSITE PARTY(IES)
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 05.05.2016
Date of Decision: 05.10.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OP under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that the complainant for higher professional Technical studies i.e. B.Tech. got admission with OP with admission office at Prashant
CC No. 469/2016 Page 1 of 7
Vihar, Delhi and paid advance fee as per rules of OPs i.e. Rs.10,000/- was paid on 08.07.2013, Rs.50,000/- was paid on 23.07.2013, Rs.32,000/- was paid on 10.08.2013 to OP-1 vide receipts no.130115 dated 08.07.2013, no.130128 dated 23.07.2013 & no.130139 dated 10.08.2013 respectively. On 27.09.2013, the complainant made an application to OP for return of original certificates, college fee and bus fee. On 07.10.2013, the complainant wrote another application to OP-2 requesting for return of fee as agreed with OP to return fee and return of original certificates/documents, if the complainant could get admission in other universities, as he got admission in B.Tech., I.P. University, Delhi and on 30.09.2013, the complainant wrote letter to The Registrar, SBIT College, Pallri, Sonepat, Haryana for return of fee and documents and the complainant sent legal notice to OP-2 for return of original certificates and refund of entire amount of Rs.92,000/- and also made application to the Director, Technical Education (D.T.E.), Haryana, Sector-17, Chandigarh-160017 against OP for direction to OP to refund the entire fee and Haryana State Technical Education Society Panchkula, Chandigarh sent reply issued vide endorsement no. 1036-38/HSTES dated 22.05.2014 and directed OP-2 to return original certificates and fee within seven days to the complainant, but OP failed to comply the order of Haryana State Technical Education Society Panchkula and
CC No. 469/2016 Page 2 of 7
also failed to comply the rules on refund policy and thus there is a deficiency in service.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the present complaint and prayed to direct OPs to return original certificates of the complainant, to return fee of Rs.92,000/- alongwith interest as well as compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental agony and harassment and also sought interest @ 18% on delayed payment and has also sought cost of litigation. The complainant has also filed an application dated 30.03.2017 u/s 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the complaint case dated 26.03.2015 alongwith supporting affidavit duly attested dated 26.03.2015 was filed before this Forum on 02.07.2015 and the renovation work of the Forum was going on in July-2015 and the case file was not traceable in the Forum despite many efforts and in the month of April-2016, the staff of the Forum telephonically informed the complainant that the file has been traced and listed for hearing on 05.05.2016. Accordingly, the complainant has sought condonation of delay in filing the complaint.
3. OP has been contesting the case and filed reply and submitted that the complaint is time barred and has been filed beyond the period of limitation and is liable to be dismissed. OP further submitted that the complaint is not maintainable as the complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2 (1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer
CC No. 469/2016 Page 3 of 7
Protection Act, 1986. Op further submitted that the complainant had given very clear undertaking that he has understood the cancellation and refund policy of OP and accordingly the case is not maintainable. However, OP admitted that the complainant had taken admission with OP on 08.07.2013 in the B.Tech. course (4 year duration) and applied for cancellation of admission on 27.09.2013, after the cut-off date which was 15.08.2013 and OP could not entertain any application for refund of fees after 15.08.2013 being in violation of guidelines no. AICTE/Legal/04(01)/20147, April and notification no. Legal/12(06)/2012 and OP replied to the legal notice of the complainant vide reply dated 10.02.2014. OP has also filed reply to the application u/s/ 24-A of the Consumer Protection Act filed by the complainant and has denied the grounds taken by the complainant in his application.
4. It is not out of place to mention here that earlier a commonex-parte order dated 31.10.2016 was passed by this Forum against OP and feeling aggrieved, OP challenged the said order before Hon’ble State Commission by filing appeals bearing F.A. No.29/2017, 30/2017, 31/2017 & 32/2017 which were decided vide order dated 09.03.2017 by Hon’ble State Commission and order dated 31.10.2016 of this Forum was set-aside and the case has been remanded to this Forum.
5. The complainant filed rejoinder and denied the submissions of OP.
6. In order to prove his case, the complainant filed his affidavit in
CC No. 469/2016 Page 4 of 7
evidence and has also filed written arguments. The complainant has also placed on record copies of fee receipts no. 130115 dated 08.07.2013 of Rs.10,000/-, no. 130128 dated 23.07.2013 of Rs.50,000/- and no. 130139 dated 10.08.2013 of Rs.32,000/- issued by OP, copies of letters dated 27.09.2013, 30.09.2013 and 07.10.2013 sent by complainant to Director, SBIT, DCR University seeking refund of fee and return of original certificates, copy of Legal notice sent by the complainant through his Counsel to OP through speed post and reply of Joint Director, Haryana State Technical Education Society, Panchkula issued vide endst. No. 1036-38 dated 22.05.2014 given directions to OP to refund the fee as per rules.
7. On the other hand, Sh. Vipin Malhotra, Administrative Officer of OP filed his affidavit in evidence. OP also filed written arguments. OP also filed copy of undertaking dated 14.08.2013 given by the complainant, copy of letter dated 27.09.2013, 08.10.2013 of the complainant, copy of refund policy as per AICTE guidelines, copy of notification of AICTE, copy of reply dated 10.02.2014 sent by OP to the complainant and copy of SPA in favour of Sh. Vipin Malhotra.
8. This Forum has considered the case of the complainant in the lightof the facts contained in the complaint, reply of OP, evidence of the parties and documents placed on record. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and there is nothing on record to disbelieve the same. The OP is not justified in contending
CC No. 469/2016 Page 5 of 7
that the case of the complainant is time barred. OP in reply to the application of the complainant seeking condonation of delay has not specifically disputed that during the relevant period i.e. in the month of July-2015, renovation work of the Forum was going on. The complaint is supported by a duly attested affidavit dated 26.03.2015. So, it cannot be said that the complaint was filed in May-2016. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the complaint is time barred.
9. As regards, the refund policy as per AICTE guidelines and subsequent notification, OP is required to show that the seat which was vacated by the complainant could not be filled by other candidate and no record by OP has been produced to show as to on which date session was started. So, OP cannot forfeit whole of the amount of fee deposited by the complainant. Furthermore, the case laws which have been relied by OP are not applicable to the facts of the present case as the case in hand pertains to refund of fee and moreover, OP has failed to comply the directions dated 22.05.2014issued by the Joint Director, Haryana State Technical Education Society, Panchkula.
10. In the light of above discussion, we are of the opinion that OP is guilty ofunfair trade practice and deficiency in service. We direct both the OPsas under:
i) To refund to the complainantan amount of Rs.91,000/- after deducting Rs.1,000/- as per refund policy.
CC No. 469/2016 Page 6 of 7
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and harassment.
iii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.8,000/- towards as cost of litigation.
11. The above amount shall be paid by the OPsjointly or severally to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order failingwhich OPs shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of receiving copy of this order till the date of payment. If OPs fail to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving copy of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 5thday of October, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No. 469/2016 Page 7 of 7
UPLOADED BY: SATYENDRA JEET YADAV
