<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint No.135 of 2007.<br /> <br /> Instituted On 25.10.2007.<br /> <br /> Date of Service: 22.11.2007.<br /> <br /> Decided On:15.05.2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 1. Sandeep Singh (aged 18 years) son of Sh.Harnek Singh son of Sh.Sher Singh.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Harnek Singh (aged 47 years) son of Sh.Sher Singh, <br /> <br /> both residents of Gali no.7A, Dashmesh Nagar, Moga, Distt.Moga.<br /> <br /> Complainants.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Versus<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 1. The Central Board of Secodnary Education through its Regional Officer, Regional Office, Panchkula.<br /> <br /> 2. Dr.Saif-Ud-Din Kitchlu Memorial Public School, FCI Road, Moga, through its Chairman.<br /> <br /> 3. Secret Heart School, Dosanj Road, Moga through its Chairman.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Opposite Parties.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint under section 12 of The<br /> <br /> Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Quorum: Sh.J.S.Chawla, President.<br /> <br /> Smt.Bhupinder Kaur, Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Present: Sh.M.S.Sagoo, Adv.counsel for the complainant.<br /> <br /> Sh.Vijay Dhir, Adv.counsel for OP-1<br /> <br /> Sh.Sunil Garg, Adv.counsel for OP-2<br /> <br /> Sh.Nasib Bawa, Adv.counsel for OP-3<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (J.S.CHAWLA, PRESIDENT)<br /> <br /> Sh.Sandeep Singh and Harnek Singh complainants have filed the present complaint under section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after referred to as ‘Act’) against The Central Board of Secondary Education through its Regional Officer, Regional Office, Panchkula (herein-after referred to as ‘CBSE’) and others-opposite parties directing them to change the name of mother of complainant no.1 in All India Senior Secondary Certificates issued vide Roll no.265452 from Jaswinder Kaur to Veer Kaur deciding the application of the complainant no.1 filed on 14.6.2007 immediately or any other relief to which this Forum may deem fit be granted.<br /> <br /> 2. Briefly stated, Sh.Sandeep Singh complainant no.1 has passed his matriculation examination in March 2005 from OP-3 who duly issued the certificate bearing no.TT 6936782 alongwith statements of marks and migration certificate in which the father’s name of complainant no.1 was duly incorporated. That there was no practice of writing the name of mother of candidate before matriculation.That after the marriage as per custom of family, the name of mother of complainant no.1 has been changed to Jaswinder Kaur from Veer Kaur.But as usual, in all the documents and certificates, the name of mother of complainant no.1 is Veer Kaur. That after passing matriculation examination, inadvertently, the complainant no.1 had filled the admission form with OP-2 describing his mother’s name as Jaswinder Kaur.That when this mistake came into the knowledge of complainant no.1, he immediately submitted written request and representation to OP1-CBSE requesting them to correct the name of his mother as Veer Kaur instead of Jaswinder Kaur which was duly received by them on 14.6.2007, but till date the OP1-CBSE did not pay any heed to his request. That the acts and conduct of the OP1-CBSE had caused great inconvenience, harassment and mental agony to them. Hence the present complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs. OP1-CBSE appeared through Sh.Vijay Dhir Advocate whereas OP2-Dr.Kitchlu School appeared through Sh.Sunil Garg Advocate and OP3-Secret Heart School appeared through Sh.Nasib Bawa Advocate and they filed their separate written replies contesting the same. <br /> <br /> 4. OP1-CBSE took up preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form; that the dispute does not fall within the ambit of the Act; that the complainant no.1 is not their ‘consumer’ and complainant has no jurisdiction at Moga to file the present complaint. On merits, it was averred that the particulars of the complainant no.1 has been sent by the school to the Board through list of candidates in which the name of complainant’s mother was mentioned as Jaswinder Kaur by the School and the same was duly signed by the Principal of OP-2 and counter signed by the complainant no.1 himself in token of its correctness. Hence, no cause of action arose to the complainants against them.<br /> <br /> 5. The OP2-Dr.Kitchlu School in their separate written reply took up preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form. On merits, it was admitted that the complainant no.1 has appeared in +2 examinations through their school and has taken the admission in +1 class. All other allegations made in the complaint are denied being wrong and incorrect. <br /> <br /> 6. The OP3-Secret School in their separate written reply took up preliminary objections that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. The answering OP has been impleaded unnecessarily, even no relief has been claimed against them. On merits, it was admitted that complainant no.1 passed his matriculation examination from the answering OP but they denied if the complainant no.1 appeared in +2 through them. So the complaint against them is false and frivolous. Hence, there was no deficiency in service on their part. All other allegations contained in the complaint were specifically denied being wrong and incorrect. Hence it was prayed that the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and it deserves dismissal.<br /> <br /> 7. In order to prove their case, the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant no.2 Ex.A1, copy of complaint Ex.A2, copy of pass certificate Ex.A3, copy of detail marks card Ex.A4, copy of migration certificate Ex.A5, copy of character certificate Ex.A6, certificate of PSEB Ex.A7, copy of certificate Ex.A8, copy of birth certificate Ex.A9, copy of ration card Ex.a10, copies of voter cards Ex.A11 and Ex.A12, Copies of detailed marks cards Ex.A13 and Ex.A14, copy of migration certificate Ex.A15 and closed their evidence.<br /> <br /> 8. To rebut the evidence of the complainants, the OPs no.1 to 3 tendered the affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.D.R.Yadav, Regional Officer Ex.R1, copies of bye-laws Ex.R2 and Ex.R3, copy of list of candidates Ex.R4, copy of form Ex.R5, copy of transfer certificate Ex.R6, copy of statement of marks Ex.R7, copy of migration certificate Ex.R8, copy of admission register Ex.R9, affidavit of Sunil Garg Chairman Ex.R10, affidavit of Vijay Jeba Kumar Principal Ex.R11, copy of admission and withdrawal Ex.R12, copy of registration form Ex.R13, copy of receipt of detailed marks Ex.R14, copy of counter foil Ex.R15 and closed their respective evidence.<br /> <br /> 9. We have heard the arguments of Sh.M.S.Sagoo ld. counsel for the complainant, Sh.Vijay Dhir ld. counsel for the OP-1, Sh.Sunil Garg ld.counsel for OP-2 and Sh.Nasib Bawa ld.counsel for OP-3 and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.<br /> <br /> 10. The main grouse of ld.counsel for the complainants was that the complainant no.1 had moved an application Ex.A2 to the Joint Secretary/Regional Officer, Central Board of Secondary Education, Panchkula regarding the change of his mother’s name, but inspite of this, the OP1-CBSE has not corrected the same. This contention of the ld.counsel for the complainants has some force. Admittedly, the complainant no.1 was studying in the school of OP3-Secret Heart School and passed his matriculation/Indian Certificate of Secondary Education Examination in March 2005 vide Index no.T/5973/109. In the said certificate, the father’s name of the complainant no.1 is mentioned as Harnek Singh while the name of his mother has been mentioned as Jaswinder Kaur. Admittedly, the name of mother of complainant no.1 is Veer Kaur, but after the marriage her name has been changed as Jaswinder Kaur by her in-laws. So the alleged mistake, if any, had been committed by the OP1-CBSE at the instance of complainant no.1 who himself has mentioned the name of his mother as Jaswinder Kaur and not Veer Kaur.<br /> <br /> 11. It is admitted case of the parties that the complainant no.1 had moved an application Ex.A2 for the change of name of his mother’s name which has duly been received by OP1-CBSE on 14.6.2007. But this application is still pending and has not been decided by OP1-CBSE from the last about one year for the reasons best known to them. The OP1-CBSE shall have decided the same as per their rule and regulation. Thus, we direct the OP1-CBSE to decide this application regarding the change of mother’s name of complainant no.1 either way as per rules of Central Board of Secondary Education. <br /> <br /> 12. The ld. counsel for the parties did not urge or argue any other point before us.<br /> <br /> 13. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant has some merit and the same is partly accepted. The OP1-CBSE is directed to decide the application given by complainant no.1 on 14.6.2007 regarding the change of his mother’s name within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Bhupinder Kaur) (J.S.Chawla)<br /> <br /> Member President<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Announced in Open Forum.<br /> <br /> Dated:15.05.2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />