Haryana

Ambala

CC/61/2012

MOHINDER KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

DIRECTOR,THROUGH KALPI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - Opp.Party(s)

SUDHIR GAKHAR

16 Sep 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                        Complaint Case No. :  61 of 2012

Date of Institution    :  14.02.2012

Date of Decision      :   16.09.2015

Mohinder Kumar son of Sh. Chandrika Pandit resident of 541, Adarsh Colony, Near Shiv Mandir, Patiala.

                                                                                                                                                                                   ……….Complainant

                                                                                  Versus

Director, Kalpi Institute of Technology, Ambala-Jagadhari Road,  National

Highway No.73, Near Kalpi Air Force Station, Kalpi, Ambala Cantt.

          ……Opposite Party

Complaint under Section 12 of the  Consumer Protection Act.

CORAM:    SH. A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                   SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.                  

Present:       Sh. Sudhir Gakhar, Adv. counsel for complainant.

                   Sh. Navneet Singh, Adv. counsel for Op.

ORDER:

                   Present complaint has been filed by the complainant alleging therein that  he applied with the OP institute in the faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Second Year through Lateral Entry Scheme (L.E.E.T) and deposited requisite fees vide receipt dated 13.09.2011 vide serial No.484.  After two weeks of the admission, complainant withdrew from the seat since he got admission in some other institute affiliated with Punjabi University, Patiala which is situated at native place of the complainant.  As such, on 28.09.2011, complainant duly applied for refund of his entire tuition/admission fee to the OP  who duly assured the complainant to refund his entire fees very shortly. The complainant keeping on contact with the OP but the OP did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant rather lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other and finally refused to refund the fees. Hence, the present complaint seeking relief as per prayer clause.

 

2.                Upon notice, Op appeared through counsel and filed written statement admitting  that the complainant got admission in the second year through LEET and paid the prescribed fees but it has been denied by the OP that  the complainant  applied for the refund of entire tuition- cum-admission fees as alleged.  In fact, complainant has not  informed the OP within the prescribed time for withdrawal from the course i.e. upto 30.09.2011 which was later on extended  to 30.10.2011 as per guidelines of Kurukshetra University & Haryana State Counseling Society and as per guidelines of AICTE for the academic year 2011, last date for giving refund intimation by a candidate/student was 30^th October 2011 which was the last date of admission but the complainant neither applied for refund of admission fees nor informed the OP in this regard, so there is no  question to refund the admission fees. In the end, prayer for dismissal  of the complaint with costs has been sought by the OP.  

3.                In evidence, the counsel for complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexures C-1 to C-7 and closed the evidence whereas on the other hand, counsel for the Op tendered affidavit of Sh. V.P. Aneja, Executive Director of OP as Annexure RX alongwith documents as Annexures R-1 to R-4 and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record very carefully. Before proceeding further, the foremost question arises for consideration before the Forum is “Whether the educational institutions are providing any service to the students?”

                   In P.T. Koshy & Anr. Versus Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors. 2012(3) CPC 615 (SC), Hon’ble Apex court after referring to judgment Maharshi Dayanand University Vs. Surjeet Kaur 2010 (11) SCC 159 has held that education is not commodity and Educational institutions are not providing any service. Therefore, in the matter of admission, fee etc. there cannot be a question of deficiency in service. Such matters cannot be entertained  by the Consumer Fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

Further in case titled as Bihar School Examination Board Vs. Suresh Parshad Sinha, reported in CPJ 2009(IV) Pg.34 (SC), Hon’ble Supreme court has  held that the examination fee paid by student is not a consideration for availment of service, but charge paid for privilege of participation in examination.  It has also been held that education Boards and universities are not ‘Service provider’ and the complaints against them are not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act. 

                   Further, in another case law titled as ICL Institute of Management and Technology Vs. Ranjit Singh & Anr. First Appeal No.166 of 2014 decided on 12.05.2014, our Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, Panchkula has held that the complaint for refund of fees was not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act before the Fora.

                   In view of the legal position enunciated above, present complaint is not maintainable before this Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, hence, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the complainant shall have liberty to seek his grievance before the proper Forum or Civil Court, as per law.  Complainant can seek help for condonation of delay in accordance with law laid down in Luxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute reported in SCC 1995(3) Pg. 583. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules.  File after due compliance be consigned to record room.

Announced:16.09.2015                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

                                                                                                 Sd/-

                                                                                    (A.K. SARDANA)

                                                                                            PRESIDENT        

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                                  (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                            MEMBER