BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint No.404/2019.
Date of instt.: 29.07.2019.
Date of Decision: 25.02.2020.
Sunil Kumar son of Shri Ram Sawrup, resident of village Bakrianwali, Tehsil and District Sirsa. Mobile No. 94166-05400, 79880-89399.
……….Complainant.
Versus
Exam Controller, Ch. Devi Lal University, Sirsa.
..……..Opposite Party.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
Before: SH.R.L.AHUJA…………………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Shri D.S. Smagh, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
In brief, the case of the complainant is that in the year 2010 complainant had taken admission in M.A. Economics (Hons), the session of which was from 2010 to 2015 and in the year 2013 up to 6th semester, the certificate of graduation was to be given. He had given exam of 6th semester in May, 2013 and he was declared fail in three subjects i.e. EH32, EH34 and EH35 and he was given four marks in EH35. In May, 2014 he had given exam of reappear in which two subjects were cleared but for subject EH35 for which he had applied for reappear in time, the exam of same was conducted very late in May 2015 but he was again declared fail in that subject and thereafter he again applied for reappear, the exam of which was also conducted late in May, 2016 and he was declared fail after giving 23 marks. It is further averred that thereafter he again applied for reappear exam and same was also conducted late in May 2017 and by giving 7 marks he was again declared fail whereas as per rules after re-appear exam if marks are less then earlier obtained maximum marks in the subject are added but in his mark sheet, seven marks were shown instead of obtaining of 23 marks. That he was to be given graduation certificate up to 6th semester in year 2013 but in one subject EH35 he is being declared fail till now and he has been given less marks than the obtained marks which is wrong. It is further averred that for the reappear exam which was given in May, 2017, he has been given certificate for two times i.e. on 27.11.2018 and 8.12.2018 and in this manner the University administration is negligent in issuance of certificate as two certificates have been issued for one exam. It is further averred that on 7.12.2018 he had applied for revaluation of mark sheet of exam of May, 2017 but he has not been given result of the same so far. In this regard he had lodged a complaint to the Exam Controller on 21.5.2019, the complaint number of which is 8423 but he has not been given any reply so far. It is further averred that University administration is not giving any heed to his requests and when he approaches to the result branch, the matter is prolonged on one pretext or the other and he has suffered a lot of harassment. That his grievance has not been redressed so far and he is being declared fail in one subject again and again and by taking exam of re-appear very late great loss to his educational future is being caused. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed reply taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that in the present complaint dispute regarding academic matters against the university has been raised and keeping in view the facts detailed in the complaint, the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act are not applicable in the present complaint and complaint is liable to be dismissed. That the university is not rendering any service and is only performing its statutory obligation of conducting examination of the students as per the duties assigned by the State Legislature by way of Ch. Devi Lal University Act, 2003. Accordingly, the university is not rendering service and present complaint is not maintainable as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. On merits, it is submitted that as per his own case, the complainant appeared in examination in May 2013 for 6th semester and that he was declared fail in three papers EH32, EH34, EH35 and was awarded 4 marks in paper EH35. It has been further stated in the complaint that he re-appeared in examination in May 2014 for all three subjects and that out of three, he was declared pass in two papers but declared fail in paper EH35. He has further stated that he again reappeared in May 2015 for the paper EH35 but again declared fail and that he also appeared in examination in May, 2016 wherein he was awarded 23 marks but was declared fail. He has further stated that he again appeared in examination in May, 2017 and was declared fail as he was awarded 07 marks in that paper. In this way, as per his own statement, the complainant could not pass 6th semester examination in all subjects. It is further submitted that to pass an examination, a candidate is to score 28 marks out of 70 marks. In none of the examination, he could score the minimum pass marks. It is wrong that in case of re-appear the maximum marks in previous examination are added in the subsequent papers. There is no such rule of the University. That 23 marks which he had obtained in examination held in May, 2016 cannot be added with 7 marks which he obtained in examination held in 2017. Even in case of re-evaluation of the paper no such provision exists. The case of complainant is not of re-evaluation either. It is further submitted that since the complainant could not pass examination in paper EH35, therefore, he cannot be awarded graduation certificate as alleged. He could not pass the said examination till date and it is incorrect that he has been awarded less marks as alleged. It is further submitted that there was an error in his father’s name in the DMC for examination of May, 2017, therefore, a corrected DMC was sent to him. There was no change in the marks obtained by him in the said examination or in the result. That vide application dated 7.12.2019, the complainant had applied for re-evaluation of the paper held in May, 2017. The re-evaluation result of May, 2017 examination has been declared by the University vide result notification bearing Endst. No. Result/2019/3031-3034 dated 29.8.2019. On re-evaluation in paper EH35, he obtained 06 marks with result as re-appear. The re-evaluation of the paper EH35 has been conducted in accordance with University rules and regulations. There has been delay or deficiency in service on part of the University. All other contents of the complaint are denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
3. The parties then led their respective evidence.
4. We have heard complainant as well as learned counsel for opposite party and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of roll number slip (provisional) Ex.C1, copy of application dated 17.5.2019 Ex.C2, copy of notice regarding hearing Ex.C3, copy of result cum detailed marks card of exam, May 2017 Ex.C4, copy of detailed result Ex.C5, copy of result cum detailed marks card of May, 2017 Ex.C6, copy of result cum detailed marks card of exam May, 2016 Ex.C7. On the other hand, opposite party has furnished affidavit of Sh. Krishan Kumar Yadav, Assistant Result Branch as Ex.R1, authority letter Ex.R2, copy of result notification Ex.R3 and copies of result sheets Ex.R4 to Ex.R8.
6. Admittedly, complainant Sunil Kumar is student of M.A. Economics (Hons) of Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sirsa and for getting certificate of graduation he had been appearing in exams since 2013 and lastly he appeared in re-appear examination which was conducted in May, 2017 and he got 7 marks and was declared unsuccessful. Thereafter, he applied for re-evaluation and in re-evaluation he got only 5 marks.
7. The main allegation of complainant against opposite party is that op is harassing the complainant and not declaring him successful despite his appearing in the exam repeatedly in subject EH-35 and as a result of which he has not completed his degree. This contention of complainant appears to be devoid of merit, but however, contention of complainant qua the fact that as result was declared on 28th September, 2017, but however, detailed marks card was issued/ dispatched on 8.12.2018 after lapse of more than a year has substance. The perusal of copy of result cum detailed marks card Ex.C4 which has been produced by complainant reveals that result of exam which was conducted in May, 2017 was declared on 28.9.2017, but however, detailed marks card was issued and dispatched on 8.12.2018. Similarly, another detailed marks card copy of which has been placed on record as Ex.C6 reveals qua exam which was conducted in May, 2017 and result was declared on 28.9.2017, but however, detailed marks card was issued on 27.11.2018. The op has taken the plea in the written statement that there was an error in his father’s name in DMC for examination May, 2017, therefore, a corrected DMC was sent to him but there was no change in the marks obtained by him in the said examination or in the result.
8. During course of arguments, learned counsel for op has conceded the fact of late issue of detailed marks card after more than a year since day of declaration of result which clearly reflects lapses on the part of op and deficiency in service. It appears that complainant was deprived from re-appearing in the exam of this subject EH-35 due to lapses on the part of op.
9. In view of above discussion, we allow this complaint and direct the opposite party to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law and to provide an opportunity to the complainant to re-appear in exam of subject EH-35 which is to be held in near future alongwith other students of the same class on payment of requisite examination fee. We further direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member President,
Dated:25.02.2020. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
