BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION - AT HYDERABAD.FA.No.1216/2005 against CC.No.360/2003 District Consumer Forum-I, Hyderabad.
Between-
Ms.N.Jotsna, D/Aged about 18 years, R/o.140/B,
Sanjeeva Reddy Hyderabad – 038,
(The complainant is now major and she is representing the case on her own capacity)
…Appellant/Complainant.
And
1.The Commissioner of Technical Education,
Hyderabad – 028.
2.The Principal,
S.R.R.Engineering College,
3.The Secretary,
S.R.R.Engineering College,
…Respondents/
Counsel for the Appellant -
Counsel for the Respondents -
QUORUM- THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,
AND
SMT.M.SHREESHA
THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY,
TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.
Oral Order (Per
-------
1. This is an appeal preferred by an unsuccessful complainant aggrieved by the order of the District Consumer Forum-I, Hyderabad, dated 24.03.2005 in CD.No.360/2003 in dismissing her complaint.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that she was allotted a seat in CSE Branch in S.R.R. Engineering College, She paid Rs.22,000/- towards fees by way of Demand Draft, Rs.3,500/- towards caution deposit, Rs.3,000/-book bank scheme, Rs.8,000/- towards hostel advance. Later she requested the 2nd opposite party college to cancel her admission and return the original certificates on the ground that she was pursuing education in another college. The third opposite party, the Secretary of On that, as she had no other go paid Rs.4 Consequently, her seat was cancelled. A notice was issued to return the amounts paid by her. However, the college refuted the same.
3. The 1st opposite party did not choose to contest before the District Forum and therefore, it was set The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties denied the allegations made in the complaint. They stated that the complainant on her own risk got admitted in another college. Her admission was not cancelled. Therefore, she was not entitled to any of the amounts. There was no coercion or force used for of Rs.4,000/- and since her request was contrary to the rules and regulations, she was not entitled to any of the amounts.
4. The complainant in proof of her case filed her affidavit and documents marked as Exs.A.1 to A.1 to A.10, while the opposite parties did not file any document. The District Forum opined that the complainant on her own volition cancelled the admission and as such she was not entitled to any amount.
5. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal contending that the admission was provisional till the counseling process was completed. She was at liberty to cancel the admission as per rules till the admission became final. Since the admissions were continued Therefore she sought the amounts to be returned to her.
6. It is not in dispute that the complainant having succeeded in EAMCET examination was allotted seat in the 2nd and respondent college. We may mention here that the allotment was provisional evidenced under Ex.A.1 Provisional Allotment Order passed by the 1st respondent. Accordingly, she paid Rs.22 When she was allotted seat in S.R.R. Engineering College, the 2nd respondent herein, she paid Rs.3 evidenced under receipts Exs.A.3 to A.5. Later her father addressed Ex.A.6 letter, requesting the 2nd respondent to cancel her allotment, and pay the amounts paid by her and return the original certificates. Ex.A.8 is the reply given by the 2nd respondent informing that cancellation was made by her, and therefore, no amount whatsoever, would be paid. While rejecting her request to return the amounts, they sought an amount of Rs.4 Thereupon the complainant issued Ex.A.9 notice seeking return of Rs.22,000/- paid towards admission fee, Rs.14,500/- towards caution deposit , book bank scheme and hostel advance, for which the 3rd respondent gave a reply under Ex.A.10 to his counsel.
7. It is also not in dispute that the complainant sought cancellation of the seat even before closure of counseling process. The Two rules were appended to the admission letter of
-1. Request for change of options after allotment of a seat will not be entertained since the process will hamper the chances of other candidates being counseled at different centers.
2. Request for cancellation of seat immediately after the allotment will not be entertained. However, the cancellation will be permitted only on valid reasons and that too at the end of the ongoing phase of admissions.-
The fact that she paid Rs.4 Having taken the amount of Rs.4 If the cancellation fee is not taken, for some valid reasons, it can be presumed, that the candidate would not be entitled to the Having allowed the candidate to cancel her seat on payment of Rs.4 We may mention herein that this amount was paid even before expiry of the period of counseling.
8. After the allotment of seat , she paid Rs.3,500/- towards caution deposit evidenced under Ex.A3, Rs.8,000/- towards hostel advance evidenced under Ex.A.4, and Rs.3,000/- towards book bank scheme evidenced under Ex.A.5. It is not the case of the college that she studied for some time and as such she had taken the books and utilized the same. She was not even admitted in the even for one day. The caution deposit which she paid under Ex.A.3 was obviously taken in order to see that if any amounts were due by her the same could be recovered from her and the remaining balance could be paid at the time of completion of her education. Since the complainant did not study even for one day and even before completion of the Despite the fact that notices were served, the respondents did not choose to contest nor could substantiate as to how they could deduct the amounts covered under Exs.A.3 to A.5.
9. Therefore, the appeal is allowed modifying the order of the District Forum directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents, the college, to pay Rs.22,000/- paid towards In the circumstances, we do not intend to award interest as the complainant did not join the college on her volition. No order as to costs.
PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
Dt-17.07.2008.
