Delhi

West Delhi

CC/12/347

Sumitra D/o. Shri Ayodhya Prasad - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dr. A.S. Vats, Sai Education Cell - Opp.Party(s)

14 Mar 2017

ORDER

    CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

                                        GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

  150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, JanakPuri, New Delhi – 110058

 

                                                                                                        Date of institution: 04.06.2012

Complaint Case. No.347/12                                                           Date of order: 14.03.2017

IN  MATTER OF

Sumitra D/o. Shri Ayodhya Prasad, House No.D-1/28 A, Jeevan Park, Pankha Road, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059.               

                                                                                                                                                Complainant

VERSUS

Dr. A.S. Vats, Sai Education Cell, G-55, Kiran Garden, Near Pillar No.714, Nawada, Uttam Nagar, Delhi-110059.                                                                                                Opposite party

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI, PRESIDENT

1.      The brief relevant facts necessary for disposal of the present complaint as stated and make out from pleadings and evidence of the parties are that Dr. A.S.Vats here in the opposite party is running an institute  in the name and style of Sai Education Cell for  degree and diploma courses  by distance learning programmes  at Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. Sumitra named above here in the complainant through the opposite party on 25.01.11 on payment of Rs.24,000/- by cheque as first term charges took admission in JBT two years  diploma course in Data Ranpat Dev Elementary Teacher Training & Research Institute, Kathua (J&K) affiliated with Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu hereinafter in short referred as the institute for the session 2010-12. The opposite party told the complainant that examination of first term will be held in September, 2011. But the opposite party failed to give any proof of her enrollment and payment of fee with the institute. The opposite party asked the complainant to pay Rs.17,000/- remaining fee for second year. But the complainant refused to pay the fee. The opposite party also took original mark sheets and certificates of 10^th and 12^th standard of the complainant. The opposite party failed to return her original mark sheets and certificates of 10^th and 12^th standard. Hence, the present complaint for direction to the opposite party to return her original mark sheets and certificates of 10^th and 12^th standard and pay compensation for loss of time and money on account of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

2.      After notice of the opposite party appeared and filed reply while contesting the complaint stating that the opposite party is running Coaching and Admission Information Centre for UGC approved universities and teaching colleges for the last ten years. They help students in taking admission in distance and regular diploma and degree programmes from different boards and universities. The complainant visited the opposite party for counseling of teaching diploma of two years as a regular student from Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu. The opposite party advised here for admission in two years regular Elementary Teacher Training diploma in Data Ranpat Dev Elementary Teacher Training & Research Institute, Kathua (J&K). She paid Rs.24,000/- by cheque as charges for first year of the programme. The opposite party forwarded her case for management seat. On commitment of sincere and regular studies by the complainant and payment of fee of the next session, the complainant took admission in the session 2010-12. But the Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu cancelled the session 2010-12 and shifted the complainant in the session 2011-13. The complainant was accordingly informed. The opposite party took service charges of Rs.4,000/-only as counseling fee from the complainant and deposited the remaining amount of R.20,000/- with the institute as fee. The complainant again completed formalities for the session 2011-13. But she did not attend classes regularly. The complainant is also pursuing B.A.(Hons) Hindi from Kalindi College, Patel Nagar, New Delhi and as per the instructions of Ministry of Human Resources and Development, a student can not appear in two examinations of a diploma or degree simultaneously. Therefore, she herself refused to attend classes regularly. The original documents were deposited by the complainant with the institute. She has filed a false and frivolous complaint just to harm and harass the opposite party. He prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.      When the complainant was asked to lead evidence, she filed affidavit narrating facts of the complaint. The complainant in support of her complaint also relied upon certificate dated 30.05.12 from Indian Bank showing payment of Rs.24,000/- vide cheque no.734160 to the opposite party, Identity card for the year 13.03.11 to 13.03.12, roll number slip, statement of account and receipt of payment of fee for Rs.24,000/- dated 25.01.11.

4.      The opposite party in support of his case has relied upon. Copy of notification no.F(ETT-Exam) 1^st Yr/Annual/2011-13 dated 14.02.13 of the Jammu and Kashmir State Board of School Education revised date sheet dated 19.01.13, date sheet dated 30.11.12, letter dated 07.06.12 of Data Ranpat Dev College, Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu, cutting from newspaper, notification  no.F(Acad-C)ETT-Adm-1^sty/13-15 dated 21.05.13 of the Jammu and Kashmir State Board of School Education, receipt of the Institute dated 03.02.11 of payment of fee of Rs.20,000/- and roll number cum hall ticket dated 25.01.11. The parties have also filed written arguments.

5.      After having heard and going through the material on record, it is common case of the parties that the opposite party is a coaching and admission information centre for UGC approved universities and teaching colleges and helps students in taking admission in distance and regular diploma / degree programmes in different boards, institutions and universities. The complainant also took advice from the opposite party. The opposite party advised her for admission in 2 years  regular diploma course of JBT in the institute. She took admission in JBT two years regular diploma course for the session 2010-12. She paid a sum of Rs.24,000/- as fee for first year session.

6.      The case of the opposite party is that they deposited sum of Rs.20,000/- with the Institute and charged Rs.4,000/- for their services. The complainant was supplied identity card and admission card for appearing in the examination to be held in September, 2011. But the Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu cancelled the examination and on request of the complainant the session of the complainant was shifted from 2010-12 to 2011-13 by the Institute, Kathua (J&K). In support of his version the opposite party has relied upon letter dated 07.06.12 written by Institute to the complainant, cutting from newspaper, notification  no.F(Acad-C)ETT-Adm-1^sty/13-15 dated 21.05.13, cutting of newspaper, staff report dated 13.09.12, receipt no.483 dated 03.02.11 issued by the Institute for sum of Rs.20,000/- in the name of complainant, hall ticket dated 25.01.11.

7.      From the perusal of the documents relied upon by the opposite party it is evident that the complainant took admission in JBT diploma course for the session 2010-12 and a sum of Rs.20,000/- was paid by the opposite party to the Institute as fee and charges for the first year of the two years JBT diploma course on behalf of complainant. The examination to be held in September, 2011 was cancelled by the Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu and on the same fee of Rs.20,000/- the session of the complainant in JBT two years diploma course was shifted from session 2010-12 to 2011-13 by the institute. The complainant refused to attend classes regularly. The complainant did not attend classes. The opposite party has charged Rs.4,000/- only from the complainant for the services rendered.  There is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Whereas the complainant herself took admission in two years JBT diploma course for the session 2010-12 and later on got shifted to session 2011-13 as the examination to be held in September, 2011 could not be conducted by the Jammu & Kashmir State Board of School Education, Jammu. She herself did not attend classes. There is no unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence, there is no merit in the complaint.

8.      In the light of above discussion and observations, there is no merit in the complaint. Hence, the complaint is hereby dismissed.

Order pronounced on :14.03.2017

• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be consigned to record.

                  

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                      (URMILA GUPTA)                                      ( R.S.  BAGRI )

     MEMBER                                                      MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT