DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM;BHADRAK

…………………..

C.D.Case No.50 of 2015

Sri Tapasa Kumar Bera, aged about 27 years

S/o: Abanti Kumar Bera,

At:Jhadkata, PO: Dhamra,

PS: Bansada, Dist:Bhadrak

                                               …………………..Complainant

                   (Vrs.)

1.         Damayanti Pati,

            Principal, Fakir Mohan Private I.T.I.,

            Plot No.D-2/14, At: Industrial Estate

            PO:Balasore, Dist:Balasore-756001

2.         Secretary,

            State Council for Technical Education and

            Vocational Training, Bhubaneswar,Odisha

4.         Prahallad Panda, Aged about 44 years

            Career Counselling Agent,

            Fakirmohan Pvt. I.T.I.,Balasore

            At/PO: Jalanga, PS:Bhadrak(R),Dist:Bhadrak

                                                 ……………………….Opp.Parties

For the Complainant:  Sri Radhakanta Mohapatra & another, Advocate

For the Opp.Parties  :  Sri R.K.Nayak & Ors., Advs. for O.P.No.1

                                     Sri Bijay Kumar Dash & Ors.,Advs. for O.P.No.2

                                     Sri G.Bal & Ors., Advs. for O.P.No.4

Order No.12 dt.05.10.2015:

            This complaint has been filed by the Complainant alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps and praying for a direction to O.Ps to issue corrected final Pass Certificate and for payment of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to Complainant.

            The case of the Complainant is that he passed his National Trade Certificate Course Examination from the institute of O.P.No.1 in the month of July,2011. O.P.No.1 issued provisional certificate on 24^th May,2012 after passing of his above examination correctly. According to Complainant at the time of issuance of final pass certificate the following discrepancies were found:

1. The name of the Complainant is written as “Tapas” instead of “TAPASA”, the last word “A”  is missing,
2. The name of the father of the Complainant has been written as “Abant” instead of “ABANTI”, the last word “I” is missing; and
3. The date of issuance of final certificate is 30/02/2015, whereas last date of February is 28^th or in case of leap year it is 29^th .

The Complainant requested the O.Ps for rectification of the certificate but the O.Ps denied to do so which compelled the Complainant to file the present case on 28.04.2015 with the aforesaid prayer.

            O.P.No.1 filed his written version challenging maintainability of the present complaint before this Forum. According to him O.P.No.2 is an autonomous body of the Govt. of Odisha who conducts and supervises the ITI courses for Odisha State on behalf of Director General of Employment & Training, Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi. O.P.No.2 sends all the information to DGE & T, New Delhi after final passing of the students with all the datas and the O.P.No.1 has no role from SCTE & VT to DGE & T. When the provisional certificate is correctly issued to the students, it proves that O.P.No.1 has furnished correct information to SCTE & VT, Odisha. The wrong data in the final NCVT certificate is erroneous due to typographical error either at the SCTE & VT or at DGE & T level. He further stated that once the final certificate is issued from DGE & T, it is very difficult to rectify at that level as they are organizing this for the whole of India and even if it be sent for rectification/issue of duplicate certificate, this may be lost  in transit or it would be very difficult to track. The DGE & T Office is strictly forbidden entry by outsiders and it is housing cabin at Ministers and their Secretaries. Further, the O.P.No.1 stated that NCVT (DGE & T), Govt. of India, New Delhi is a necessary party who has not been made party to this case. This complaint is liable to  be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary party. Hence, the O.P.No.1 prayed that the case be dismissed as the Complainant is not a consumer and lacks jurisdiction.

            O.P.No.2 in his written version submitted that the National Trade Certificates are being prepared by the National Council for Vocational Training, Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment to the passed out trainees basing on the systemization data. In the instant case the Principal concerned has submitted the data in systemization admission details of the passed out trainees of his institution in shape of soft copy which was sent to NCVT, New Delhi for preparation of National Trade Certificate. After receipt of  National Trade Certificate from NCVT, the same was sent to the institution through their authorized person with the instruction to issue the certificates to the concerned trainees after proper verification. Therefore, the Council has no role for preparation of NTC. As per practice, if any mistake is pointed out by the Principal or the Trainees in the NTC, the same is submitted in the office of the SCTE &VT either by the trainees or through the Principal with the required documents for necessary correction. The same is corrected within a week. In this case, neither the Principal nor the trainee has submitted the NTC in the Office of SCTE & VT for correction. There is no provision for preparation of New NTC by the DGE & T. However, if the trainee or the Principal submit the same to the Council, the correction shall be done within a week.  Hence, the O.P.No.2 prayed for dismissal of complaint as not maintainable.

            O.P.No.3 has been set exparte as per order dt.27.06.2015.

            We have heard the Ld.Counsel for both parties and gone through the record. O.P.No.1 by filing a decision reported in 2009(II)CLR(SC)-709 along with various documents has challenged the maintainability of the present complaint sole on the ground that the Complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of the C.P.Act. It is no doubt true that the Complainant was an Ex-Trainee of O.P.No.1-Institute. While going through the Xerox copy of NTC No.0031461 filed by the Complainant,  it is found that against name of the Complainant and father’s name, the O.P.No.1 has added “a” and “i” respectively and made an endorsement on the back side of the certificate with seal and signature that corrected Name:(1) TAPASA KUMAR BERA, (2) Father’s Name: ABANTI KU.  BERA. As per version of O.P.No.2, if any mistake is pointed out by the Principal or the Trainee in the NTC, the same is submitted in the office of the SCTE &VT either by the trainee or through the Principal with the required documents for necessary correction. But it is found that the O.P.No.1-Principal without sending the certificate with supporting documents herself has made correction in the NTC in contravention of direction of the NCVT.  Further, it is found from the said Xerox copy of final certificate that O.P.No.1-Principal has put her signature with dated as 30.02.2015. It is thus clear that the O.P.No.1 instead of helping a boanfide trainee of her institute in getting the certificate corrected properly has resorted to dismissal of complaint for the reason best known to her. Therefore, it would meet the ends of justice if the O.P.No.2 be directed to make necessary correction in the certificate of the Complainant. Accordingly, it is ordered;

O R D E R

            In the result, the complaint is allowed in part against the O.Ps 1 & 2 and dismissed exparte against O.P.No.3. The Complainant is directed to submit the NTC No.0031461 before the O.P.No.1 and the   O.P.No.1 is directed to send the NTC to O.P.No.2 with the required documents for necessary correction. We also direct the O.P.No.2 to make necessary correction in the NTC within a week of receipt of the same from O.P.No.1 with proper endorsement, seal and signature so that the Complainant would not face any problem in future. Under the peculiar facts & circumstances of the case parties to bear their own costs.