Orissa

Rayagada

CC/3/2017

Sri Aruna Kumar Dolai - Complainant(s)

Versus

Controller of Examinar - Opp.Party(s)

Self

09 Nov 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 03 / 2017.                                        Date.     09. 11 . 2017.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                   President

Sri GadadharaSahu, .                               Member.

Smt.  Padmalaya  Mishra,                          Member

Sri Aruna Kumar Dolai, S/O: Nabin Dalai, Telephone Exchange lane,  Po/Dist.Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                                   …….Complainant

Vrs.

1.The Controller of Exmination,  Berhampur University, Bhanjabihar, Berhampur-7, Dist: Ganjam.

2. The Principal, Rayagada Autonomous  College,  Po/Dist.Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                 .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Self.

For the O.P  No.1:-Self..

For the O.P.No.2:- Self.               J u d g e m e n t.

        The  present disputes arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for non issuence of original certificate of B.com (General).  The brief facts of the case  has summarised here under.

1.        The complainant  has completed his studies  B.Com(General) in the year 2009 and his  Roll No. RG 7 -827    mentioned in the Provisional certificate which  was issued by the O.P .No. 1 on Dt. 30.4.2009. To get the  above original  certificate the complainant  duly filled-in the prescribed Proforma  and submitted to the O.P. No.1  with the signature of the O.P. No.2 and also deposited  Rs. 450/- vide demand draft  No.871956 Dt. 2.6.2015 and it was duly acknowledged  by the O.P. No.1 on Dt. 6.6.2015. On Dt. 9.11.2015 the O.P. No.1 has issued a  letter  to the O.P. No.2 to search out the  original certificate and to deliver to the complainant.   But till date the complainant has not received the above certificate from the O.Ps.  Hence this case. The complainant prays the forum  direct the O.Ps to issue the original certificate of B.Com(General)  in favour   of the complainant and such other relief as the hon’ble forum deems fit and proper for the best interest of justice.

2.        On being noticed the O.P. No.1 appeared in person  before the forum and filed written version. He contended  that  the original degree certificate of the complainant has been sent to the  O.P. No.2 through  the Jr. Clerk of the said college on Dt. 27.2.2012 and the same  has been informed to the college in our letter No. 988/Exam.Gen.Cert./BU/17 Dt. 3.2.2017.  Further the O.P. No.1 submitted that  so far we have not received any letter from the  O.P. No.2.  Hence the O.P. No.1 prays the forum to dismiss the complaint petition against the O.P. No.1 for the best interest of justice.

3.        The O.P.  No.2  filed written version and submitted that  after  receipt of the list of + 3   commerce  certificates 2009 batch from the  O.P. No.1  the names were verified  with the remaining  original certificates,  wherein  it is found that 2 Nos. of extra certificates found whose names does not  appear in the list.  Hence it is proved that the list of certificates do not  match with the list given by the University. The O.P. No.2 further contended  that as per the statement of the complainant  the University authorities asked him to deposit an amount of Rs.450/- towards the fees for original degree certificate. The complainant  has deposited the fees vide bank draft bearing  No. 871956 Dt.2.6.2015. The O.P. No.2 has informed the matter to the  O.P. No.1 vide their Lr. No.1166/RAC/15 Dt.2.11.2015, but the O.P. No.2 till date could not get any reply from the O.P. No.1. Therefore the O.P. No.2 prays the forum  to dismiss the complaint petition  against the O.P. No.2 for the best of interest of justice.

The O.Ps  appeared and filed their written version.  Arguments from  the O.Ps   and complainant  heard.   Perused the record, documents, filed by both  the parties. 

                Both the parties  have  vehemently advanced arguments touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

 

          FINDINGS.

4.             On perusal of the record  we observed  there is no dispute  that the complainant had appeared  examination  i.e. B.Com(General) in the year 2009  under the supervision of the O.Ps .   Again it is revealed  there is no dispute Rs.450/-   received  by the O.P. No.1 in shape of D.D.  towards  required fees  for  issue of original certificate. Again   there is no dispute  the O.P. No.2 has issued a letter No. 1166 Dt. 2.11.2015 to the O.P. No.1  regarding  issue of original certificate.

On  perusal of the written version  filed  by the  O.Ps  it is revealed that  both the  O.Ps. have  not  taken any serious  steps  for issue of original certificates in favour of the  complainant which is  negligence  and deficiency in service  on the part of the O.Ps.

Prior  to delve in to the merit  of the case on outset  we have to  consider whether the complainant is a consumer under C.P. Act ?  While answering  the issue  we would like to refer the citation.  It is held and reported  in CPR-2011(2) page No. 94 (National Commission) and reported  in  OLR(CSR) 2005(1) State commission, Cuttack  page  No. 71  where in the commissions  observed  “that Educational institution  imparting  of education  for consideration  falls within the  ambit of service as defined in the Act.  A student who takes admission in the educational institution hires  the service of the educational institution for consideration,  he is a consumer as defined under the Act.

Accordingly answered the issue.   The complainant is a consumer under the C.P. Act.

It is held and reported in Current Consumer Case 2004 page No.27 where in  the Hon’ble  Supreme Court  observed  the redressal mechanism  established  under the Act is “not supposed to supplant but to supplement the existing judicial system”. It is well settled  principle of law that the statutory authority   should act under the provisions of the relevant statue and if they do  not   act accordingly, the Consumer Forum  have the jurisdiction because  not acting under the provisions of the statute/Act it amounts to deficiency   of service.

By virtue of Article-300, if a competent legislation  enacts a law for compensation  or damage  for  an act done by it  or its officers in discharge of their statutory  duties.  Thus  a suit for it  would be maintainable.  No civilized  system  can prorupt    on executives  to play  with people  of  its country  and claim that it is entitled to act  in any manner   as it  is sovereign needs  of the state, duty of  officials  and right  of the citizens are to be reconciled.  So that  the role of law   in a welfare state  is not shaken  (N.Nagendra Rao & Co.  Vrs. State of Andhra Pradesh ( 1994) 6 SCC-205 /AIR 1994 SC  2663.     

Admittedly, in the case at hand,  the complainant has  availed  service on payment of consideration a sum of Rs.450/-   drawn in favour of the  O.P. No.1  in shape  of Demand draft  No. 871956   Dt.  2.6.2015    which was received by the O.P. No. 1  on Dt. 6.6.2015  for  issue of  original  certificate  in favour of the complainant.

On perusal of the  correspondences made  with the O.Ps  it is clearly noticed   that there is  a deficiency of service by the statutory authorities  in regard to issuance of certificates and when the application for issue of original certificate the   O.P. No.1 ought to have made an enquiry about the same, rather he has  advised to submit the bank draft for Rs.450/- for the said service and it was also duly  accepted by the O.P. No.1.  After receiving  such  cost for the said service  now both the O.Ps  are playing  mischief  in the matter  causing mental agony to the complainant  since he is unable to seek any employment without the original certificate.  Further the O.Ps are  playing   with  the career of the complainant.  We  observed the deficiency and negligence exhibited by  both the O.Ps  are so grave that such  negligence has effected   the life and avocation of a student and as such their action is deemed to have been  a breach of  the fundamental right as provided under Article- 14  of the constitution.  It is  submitted that the matter of negligence  or omission by a statutory  is to be complied soon  so that  it will not infringe the fundamental right guaranteed under the    constitution and they have a right to rectify the same and to provide such service   to the student who appeared the said examination  in the year 2009.

It is held and reported  in  C.P.R- 2010(2) page No.426  where in  the Hon’ble  State   Commission, Andhra  Pradesh  observed  “Where complainant joined M.Sc  course  and appeared in  examination  conducted   by  the  University, the latter would  be obliged  to issue original  certificate  to the complainant.”

In our view  the action of the O.P. No.1 prior to duty bound  should  have corrigendum  its  crocodile  process  to settle  the dispute of the student  and consequently  should take  warfooting   steps  to settle the  matter by issuing the original  certificate  in favour of the complainant.

In the present case the O.Ps have not come with  clean hands and their submission before this forum is found to be avoid the legitmate right as claimed by the  complainant as such the plea of the O.Ps can not be  accepted.  Since the complainant is hopefull of getting  original certificate in the door steps and denial of such legitmate right  is a deficiency of service putting the complainant in to financial trouble and to drag him in to legal complications.  Hence in order to avoid the same and to save the complainant from the present plight the O.Ps are advised  to issue original certificate in favour of the complainant in the spirit of legislation  intent.  Further  for failure to act properly by the O.Ps  the complainant should not be  deprived of their  legitmate entitlement.  It is   ensured  that the  benefits to which the complainant is eligible and entitled to enjoy  it and it should not became   a distant dream  so as to have peaceful  living.

Further we observed the O.Ps are not rendering proper service to the complainant establishes their callousness and whimsical attitude. The  forum feel that the O.Ps services are deteriorating and does not follows   ethics.  Due to the same attitude  the complainant deprived of  to get the job in these hard days.

In view of the above discussion relating to the above case and in the facts, circumstances of the case and on perusal of the record,  the complaint petition, documents and  in the light of the settled legal position stated by us  above and referring the above citations  there  exists a strong “prima facie” case in favour of the complainant. Hence  we allow the above complaint petition. 

Hence to meet the ends of justice, the following order is passed.

                                                               

                                                                                ORDER.

In Resultant the complaint petition is allowed on contest  against the O.Ps.

The  O.P. No. I  is ordered to issue original   certificate i.e. B.com(General)  course for the year 2009  bearing  Roll No. RG 7 – 827  in favour of the complainant immediately.

The O.P. No.2 is  directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.

The O.Ps  are  ordered to comply the above directions within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Dictated  and corrected by me

Pronounced on this     9th           day     of      November,       2017.

                                                                                                           

                                      Member.                                                    President.