DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 48 of 2010 Date of Inst:22.01.2010 Date of Decision:08.09.2010 Ms.Shiwani Singh daughter of Mr.Bhawani Singh r/o C-33, Set No.12, Vikas Nagar, Shimla. ---Complainant V E R S U S 1. Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations through its Secretary, Pragati House, 3rd Floor, 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019. 2. St.Xavier Sr. Secondary School, through its Principal Mervin West, Sector 44, Chandigarh. 3. The Principal Mussoorie International School, Kamty Road, Mussorie (Uttrakand). ---Opposite Parties QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER PRESENT: Sh.A.K.Jain, Adv. for complainant Sh.Jaideep Bedi, Adv. for OP No.1. Sh.I.William Gosain, Advocate for OP No.2. Sh.Keshav Kataria, Advocate for OP No.3. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Ms.Shiwani Singh has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OPs be directed to pay a sum of Rs.10 lacs as compensation for wasting her one precious year of study and for causing mental agony, harassment to her. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she took admission in Class XI in Chaman Vatika School, Ambala City in the year 2007 and was registered with OP-1 for ISCE 2009 exams. Due to health problems, the complainant approached OP-1 for her transfer in Mussorie International School vide her application (Annexure C-1). In response of her letter, OP-1 replied vide letter dated 09.06.2008 (C-2) that the complainant should apply for transfer through the Principal of the admitting school i.e. Mussorie International School where she wants to take admission. Thereafter, the complainant submitted an application dated 18.06.2008 (Annexure C-3) along with relevant documents to the Principal of Mussorie International School, Kepty Road, Uttrakhand (OP-3). OP-3 took up the matter with OP-1 and advised the complainant to enquire after about 15 days. The complainant along with her father visited the office of the Principal of the said school for seeking admission in XII class but to no effect. Ultimately, the Principal of the said school refused to give admission to the complainant in the class-XII in Mussorie International School. Thereafter, the complainant applied for admission in St.Xavier Sr. Secondary School, Chandigarh i.e. OP-2. The complainant also submitted the transfer certificate and the certificates issued by Fortis Hospital, Mohali and Department of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, PGI, Chandigarh (Annexure C-5 to C-7). OP-2 also took up the matter with OP-1 for her admission in Class XII on her transfer from earlier school i.e. Chaman Vatika, Ambala City. The complainant requested OP-2 vide letters (Annexure C-8 and C-9) for early admission to save loss of her studies and precious time. Vide letter dated 15.09.2008 (Annexure C-10), OP-2 informed OP-1 that it could not give an undertaking that the complainant would be able to fulfill the regulation of the council governing attendance. According to the complainant, OP-2 declined admission in XII class keeping in view the attendance criteria fixed by the Council for the ISCE, New Delhi. According to the complainant, due to the above said acts of omission and commission on the part of OPs, she has not only suffered mental agony and harassment but her precious one year of studies was also wasted. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by OP-1, it has been admitted that the complainant was registered with the Council for ISC Class-XII 2009 examinations in September, 2007. In the year 2008, she chose to leave the Chaman Vatika School, Ambala and took transfer certificate. In these circumstances, her candidature was not forwarded by the school in the final list of candidates for ISC Class XII 2009 examinations. Neither any registration certificate was issued to the complainant nor any such certificate has been filed by the complainant along with the complaint. Otherwise mere registration in Class XI does not confer any right upon a candidate to sit in the Class XII final examinations. It has been admitted that the complainant submitted an application for transferring her admission to the Mussorie International School and the complainant was advised to apply for transfer of the school through the Principal of the admitting school since it had no role to play in the transfer/admission of students. It has further been pleaded that the complainant approached St.Xavier Senior Secondary School, Chandigarh for admission in Class XII on 20.08.2008 and during this period, she was not studying in any affiliated school and thus she missed the classes of Class XII for more than four months. According to OP-1, the complainant could not secure admission in any school and did not attend regular classes and thereby she failed to secure minimum attendance of 75% of the total working days. Therefore, she would not have been eligible to sit for class XII examination. It has been pleaded that her admission was rightly declined by St.Xavier Senior Secondary School, Chandigarh on account of attendance criteria. According to OP-1, it is performing functions of conducting public examinations for Classes X and XII and does not grant admission to a candidate in any school. Hence the question of denial of admission to the complainant does not arise. In these circumstances, according to OP, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. In its separate written statement, OP-2 pleaded that the matter is related to complainant and ISC (OP-1) and it has no role to play. It has been pleaded that the complainant did not fill in application for admission with St.Xavier Senior Secondary School, Chandigarh. It has further been pleaded that the complainant approached Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.19785 of 2008 which was disposed of by the Hon’ble High Court with the following observations:- “The undisputed fact is that the petitioner has not attended a single class of class 12 so far. In the absence of regular attendance, we do not find any direction can be issued for permitting the petitioner to appear in the final examination of class 12 to be held in March, -April 2009 at this stage. If the petitioner has the grievance of wrongful deprivation of admission of any institute, the petitioner may seek damages in an appropriate form as may be considered by her. With this direction, the writ petition be disposed off” Against the said order of the Hon’ble High court, the complainant filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India which was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide its order dated 30.01.2009. In these circumstances, according to OP-2, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint qua it deserves to be dismissed. 5. In its separate written statement, OP-3 pleaded that the complainant had applied for transfer to OP-school in the month of May, 2008 and thereafter she sent a letter dated 18.06.2008 (Annexure C-3). It has been pleaded that the application of the complainant was screened by the Admission Incharge of Mussorie International School and the complainant and her parents were informed about the inability of OP-3 to admit the complainant owing to the strict compliance of the rules and regulations laid down by the School Board of Trustees not to admit new students in Class X and XII. According to OP-3, when the complainant approached in the month of May and June, 2008 she did not possess a transfer certificate issued by her previous school which is an essential document in case of transfers and the same was issued to the complainant by Chaman Vatika School, Ambala on 11.08.2008. Similar objections have also been taken as were taken by OPs No.2 in its written statement. In these circumstances, according to OP-3, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal qua it. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 7. The grouse of the complainant against OP-1 is that it did not allow the admission of the complainant in St.Xavier Senior Secondary School, Chandigarh on the ground that she will not be able to fulfill the conditions relating to attendance. From the perusal of the Annexure P-12, it is apparent that the complainant left Chaman Vatika, Ambala on 31.03.2008. She did not attend the 12th class even for a single day in Chaman Vatika, Ambala. She applied for admission in St.Xavier Senior Secondary School for the first time in the month of August, 2008. In its letter dated 15.09.2008 (Annexure C-10), the principal of St.Xavier Senior Secondary School informed the complainant that her request for admission in the school has been declined on the ground that she will not be able to fulfill the criteria of attendance in case she is admitted at that stage. The relevant portion of the said letter reads as under:- “With reference to your letter dated 10.09.2008 regarding the admission of candidate Shivani Singh (B/HA007/024/09) to this institution, I cannot give an undertaking that Ms. Shivani Singh will be able to fulfill the ‘regulation of the Council governing attendance. The number of working days scheduled for the academic year 2008-2009 is 210+5 (Non-instructional days) a total of 215 days. If Ms. Shivani Singh should join us by 22 Sept, 08 she will be able to attend only 95 instructional days and 2 non- instructional days i.e. 25 and 26 Sept. 08 (Founder’s day celebration) a total of 97 days out 215 days. This amounts to 45%. A photocopy of the Holiday list from the school diary is attached to validate the above. Considering the above it is impossible for me to give an undertaking regarding Ms. Shivani Singh’s attendance. Looking at the attendance criteria and the fact that Ms. Shivani Singh does not fulfill the criteria, I am refusing the admission of this candidate”. 8. Vide letter dated 10.09.2008 (Annexure C-12), OP-1 had asked the principal of St.Xavier Senior Secondary School to give an undertaking that the candidate namely Shivani Singh will be able to fulfill the criteria of attendance. As the principal could not give such an undertaking, keeping in view the remaining working days of the school, so he refused to give admission to the complainant. In such circumstances, there is no deficiency in service on the part OP-1. OP-1 could only regularize the admission and permit the complainant to appear in the examination if she fulfills the criteria of attendance. This issue was also taken up by the complainant with the Hon’ble High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court of India but got no relief. 9. As far as OPs No.2 and 3 are concerned, the complainant is not a consumer qua them. Merely by submitting an application for admission in the school, the complainant did not become a consumer qua OPs No.2 and 3. The complainant was neither given admission nor any fees was taken from her. She did not pay even a singly penny to OPs No.2 and 3 for providing any facility. Thus, the complainant is not a consumer qua these OPs. Hence, the complaint qua them is not maintainable. 10. In view of the above findings, this complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced sd/- 08.09.2010 (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | , | | 
