The present complaint case has been filed by the complainant Swati Dutta , resident of village- Saraiyahat, Subdivision and District- Dumka (Jharkhand) against O.P’s i. e (i) Examination controller, Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka, (Jharkhand) (ii) Vice Chancellor , S. K M. University, Dumka and (iii) Principal, A. S. College, Deoghar, P.S.- Degohar (Town) Sub Division and District-Deoghar U/S-12of the CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986,(hereinafter called as C.P.Act,1986) for illegally and arbitrarily not declaring result of third and final year of Add –on-certificate course in computer application examination held on 21st day of February2012 of the complainant, not supplying mark sheet and certificate of the final year examination of the said Add-on-certificate course of the complainant and thereby resulting mental harassment, mental agony to the complainant, as well as depriving her opportunities of gainful occupation in gross negligencey and deficiency in services rendered by them. The complainant has prayed to direct the O.P’s to pay Rs.2,50,000/- ( Two lac fifty thousand ) as compensation for causing mental agony, harassment, loss of earning to her, further prayed to direct the O.P’s to declare her third year and final year result of Add-on-certificate course in computer application, deliver mark sheet of third year and final year examination as well as to deliver certificate of the said course to her. The complainant has further prayed to direct the O.P’s to pay cost of the litigation.
2. The brief facts of the complainants case as revealed in the complaint petition and documents annexed therein as well as from the short notes of argument dated 22.03.2018 filed by her are as follows:-
That the complainant Swati Dutta was a student of A. S. College, Deogher under SIDO KANHU MURMU,University, Dumka and was doing Add-on-certificate course in computer application having registration No. 200/2007 under the said ,University,Dumka.
The further case of the complainant is that she passed 1st year certificate course in computer application examination of the year 2009 and her result was declared on dated 22.12.2009 and got the mark sheet of the said examination and likewise she also passed the second year examination of the said certificate course and her result was declared on 14.02.2011 and obtained the mark sheet. The complainant later appeared in the third and final year examination of the said course in the year 2012 and her examination center was D.E.O, code No.022A and Roll No 22A07092 and she appeared in the said final year examination of the aforesaid course and was declared successful in 1st class first which was published in the daily published news paper “Prabhat Khabar” but she was not supplied with copy of mark sheet of the third and final year of the above course. Thereupon, she submitted an application before the O. P. No-(iii) the Principal of A. S. college, Deoghar, who informed that the Examination controller of S. K. M. University i.e. O. P. No-(i) has not sent the mark sheet to his college and on quarry the Principal of A.S. college, Deoghar requested O. P. No-(i) on 23.05.2016 but the O. P. No.(i) did not sent either the result or mark sheet to the complainant.
The further case of the complainant is that later she requested O. P. No (i) at Dumka university office but he did not listen to her however, assured her that the result will be sent to the college concerned but even after laps of about five years her third and final year examination held on 21 February 2012 was neither declared nor mark sheet of said examination as well as certificate of the course been issued to her without her fault as a result she is feeling acute mental agony and harassment. Besides, her valuable time of five year has been wasted and, prospect for good service had been lost. The complainant having found no alternative filed this case for redressal of her grievance before this forum on 08.02.2017.
3. Having received the complaint petition the matter was fixed for hearing on the point of admission and the same was admitted on 13.04.2017 and notices were directed to be issued upon the O.P’s subsequently on service of notice O. P. No (iii) appeared on 10.06.2017 but did not file his written version as well as did not contest the case, whereas despite the service of notice remaining O.P’s i. e O.P. No. 1 and 2 did not appear as well as not opted to contest the case by filing their written version hence the case proceeded ex-parte against them vide order dated 09.11.2017.
4. Now, the point for determination is whether the complainant is a consumer with the meaning of Sec-2(1) (d) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and entitled to the reliefs claimed against opposite parties?
5. We have carefully heard the argument of the learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record along with the material and documents attached therewith.
F I N D I N G S
6. The complainant in support in her case has filed affidavited statement of witnesses including herself, out of them C.W.-1 is Shambhu Nath Dutta the father of the complainant and a witness on facts of the case and C.W.-2 Swati Dutta, is the complainant herself. Besides oral evidence the complainant has filed the following documents, which have been marked exhibits as follows:-
Ext.1- Original mark sheet of Add-on-1st year certificate course in computer application examination-2009,Roll No.022A of S. K. M. University, Dumka, Jharkhand;
Ext.2- Original mark sheet of Add-on 2nd year certificate course in computer application examination-2010, Roll No-022A of S. K. M. University, Dumka (Jharkhand);
Ext.3- Original Admit card of Add-on 1st year certificate course examination in computer application dated 04.11.2009, of the complainant;
Ext.3/1- Original admit card of Add-on 2nd year of certificate course examination in computer application dated 09.11.2010 of the complainant;
Ext.3/2-Original admit cart of Add-on 3rd year computer course examination in computer application dated 21.02.2012 of the complainant;
Ext.4- to Ext.4/4 Original Tuition fee etc. reciept No.26 dated 21.04.2009, Original Tuition fee etc. receipt No.158 dated 11.02.2010, Original Tuition fee receipt No.118 dated 15.09.2009,and Original receipt No.1367 dated 28.09.2011 issued by A. S. college, Deoghar (towards payment made by Swati Dutta);
Ext.5- Photocopy of registration certificate issued by the S. K. M. University. Dumka to the complainant;
Ext.6- Photocopy of student Identity card issued by the A. S. college,Deoghar in favour of the complainant;
Ext.7- Photocopy of application for issuing mark sheet of the complainant addressed to the Examination Controller S. K. M. University dated 09.09.2016;
Ext.8- Carbon copy of letter of Principal, A.S. college, Deoghar to the Controller of Examination S. K. M. University, Dumka to send published result of Add-on course on computer session 2009-11 dated 06.12.2010.
7. The case setup by the complainant revolves around the following points :-
- Whether imparting of education by an educational intuition falls within the ambit of “service” as defined in sec on 2(1)(o)of the C.P.Act,1986?
- Whether non decleration of result, refusal to deliver mark sheet and certificate for a long period of time of examination of the complainant does amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the university i. e S. K. M. University (O.P’s)as per section 2(1) (g) of the C.P.Act,1986?
- whether the opposite parties have not declared the result of 3rd year and final year of the Add on 3rd year computer course examination of the year2012 of the complainant and deliberately not delivering the 3rd year final year examination mark sheet and the certificate of the said course to the complainant?
- Whether the opposite parties have committed negligency and deficiency in services and for that complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
8. As all the above points are enter related and inter- connected with each other hence for the sake of brevity and convenience they are taken up together for determination . The complainant Swati Dutta has come up with a definite case that she has been a student of A.S.college ,Deoghar,which is under the SIDO-KANHU MURMU UNIVERSITY,DUMKA (Jharkhand) and pursuing Add-on certificate course ofComputer applicationand was allotted no.200/2007by the said university (Ext.5), She passed away first and second year course examinationin computer application which were declared on 22.12.2009 and 14.02.2011 respactively and to thateffect the opposite parties had issued mark sheet (Ext.1 and Ext.2).She has further claimed that she appeared in 3rd and final year examination of the year 2012 of the said course and for that O.P’s issued Admit card (Ext-3/2) bearing examination centre code D.E.O. No.022A amd roll No.22A07092 and as per the result published indaily news paper “Prabhat Khaber” she was declared successful in Firstclass first but she was not supplied with the copy of mark sheet and then she submitted anapplication beforeO. P. No.(iii)i.e. the Principal of A.S. College, Deoghar, who informed that the Examination Controller of S. K. M. University have not sent mark sheet to his college.Thereupon she requested O.P.No.(ii) i.e. Vice Chancellor ,S. K. M. University on 23.01.2016 and to the O.P No (i) Examination Controller, S. K. M. University on 09.09.2016 but O. P. No(i) did not sent themark sheet to the O.P No.(iii).She has also claimed that she requested O.P’s on several occasions but they did not listen to her and did not sent mark sheet of 3rd and final year examination and the certificate of the saidcourse to O. P. No.(iii).
C.W. No-1 Shambhu Nath Dutta, the father of thecomplainantinhis affidavited statement in Para-2 has stated on oath that his daughterSwatiDutta was a student of A.S. Colllege ,Deoghar under the S.K.M. University, Dumka and was doing Add-on certificatecourse incomputer application and the said course was three year degreecourse for which shewas registered with the S. K. M. Universityand every year she deposited tuition fees and examination fees and she passed away1st year and 2nd year examinations of that course. Similarly the complainant herself (C.W.2 Swati Dutta) in her affidavited statement in Para-2 stated that she was a student of Add-on certificate course of computer application for the session 2009-2011 ofA. S. Colleage, Deoghar which was under S. K. M. University . Thesaid course was for three years. She had taken registration and paid tuition fees and examination fees for the examinations of all the3years and had passed the said examination.
From the above affidavited statement of the complainant (C.W.No-2) andher father Shambhu Nath Dutta (C.W.No.2) and the perusal of the original tution fees receipts (Ext 4 to Ext.4/4) granted by the A.S. college affidivated with S. K. M. University it is crystalclear that the complainant Swati Dutta hired the service of the S. K. M. University ,Dumka for consideration for imparting education to her. Further it is also evident from the evidence of C.W.No.1 and his father it is evident that the O.P’s have issued admit cards (Ext.3 to 3/2), registration certificate (Ext.5) and student I card (Ext.6) taking required fees, thus the service rendered by the University is subject to condideration ,therefore such service comes under the ambit of section-2(1)(0)of the C.P.Act,1986which reads as follows:-
“Service” means service of any description which is made available to potential [users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of] facilities in connection banking, financing , insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy facilities in connection with …………….. or under a contract of personal service:- board or lodging or both [ housing construction] entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information,but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge”.
The affidavited statement of the complainant and her father as discussed above shows that complainant hired the service of the S. K. M . University on payment of fees. The said university thus imparting education to its student on payment of tuition and examination fees. The complainant has filed original and Xerox copiesof the receipts of fees showing that she had deposited fees toward tuition fee etc. On21.04.2009,11.02.2010,15.09.2009,23.09.2009,and on 28.09.2011.
In this connection learned counsel for the complainant has reliedupon the case of Sreedharan Nair N. Vs Registrar, University of Kerala reported in 1(2004)CPJ at page-27 (NC) in which theHon’ble National Commission has referredand relied upon the rulings ,which are reported in 11(2001) CPJ 74(NC) in case of Bhupes Khurana and Ors .Vs.Vishwa Bndha Parishad and ors. ,ruling reported in 1978 SC page 548 in the case of Banglore water supply and sewerage Board Vs. A. Rajappa and others.
The Hon’ble National Commission in the abovereferred ruling held. “imparting of education by educational intuitions for consideration falls within the ambit of “service” as defined in the consumer Protection Act,1986.Fees are paid for services to be rendered by way of imparting education by the educational in stitution .It there is no rendering of service, question of payment of fees would not arise .The complainanthired the service of the respondent for consideration so they are Consumers as had defined define in the C.P.Act,1986”.
Thus the services rendered by the university to the complainantfor imparting education was subject to consideration as the fees have been paid by the complainant and therefore the case comes under the preview of Sec.2(1)(o) ofC.P.Act,1986.
9. Now, we will determine whether by not declaring result by the O.P’s and not delivering the third and final year mark sheet and certificate of theAdd-on computer application course of the complainant for a perio of five yearsamounted to deficiency in service.
The deficiency in service has been defined under section 2(1)(g) of the C.P.Act,1986,which reads as under:-
Sec-2(g) “deficiency means any fault, imperfection, short coming or inadequacy in the quality nature and manner of performance which is required to bemaintained by or under any law for the time being inforce or has been under taken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service”.
In the present case the complainant has asserted that she had passed the 3rd and final year of Add-on computer application course in firstclass first but unfortunately she was not supplied with the copy of mark sheet of 3rd and final year of course as well as certificate of the course despite all attempts . She submitted application before the O. P. No(iii) and on his advice she went to the office O. P. No. (i) but O. P. No (i) did not hand over/send result as well as mark sheet to the either to O.P.No(iii) Principal,A.S. Cpllege, Deoghar or to her complainant . She has filed photocopy of her letter to Examination Controller ,S. K. M. University, Dumka through Principal A.S. College, Deoghar stating that in the year 2012 she appeared in Add-on 3rd year course examination and the result of the examination was published in news paper in which she stood 1st class first but even after the laps of 4years her mark sheet has been not delivered to her. It is also evident from this letter that Principal A.S. College, Deoghar forwarded the said letter to Examination Controller S. K. M. University but her mark sheet and certificate were not given to her. Thus, it is clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the S. K.M. (O.P’s) University.
Therefore in view of above evidence and the law discussed aboveit is proved that the opposite parties have been committed negligency and deficiency in service. Therefore this caseis maintainable before this forum, and the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed.
10. The next point for consideration is whether the complainant deserves to be compensated for the negligency and deficiency in services on the part of the Opposits Parties .
The complainant has claimed that despite her request to the opposite parties on several occasion they did not care to listen her and in absence original mark sheet and certificate of 3rd year Add-on certificate course in computer application she could not apply for service as a result she suffered financial loss as she remain jobless for sixyears.She has also claimed that due to the negligent and deficient act of the O.P’s she suffered mental agony, harassment and for all these omission and commission of the O.P’s she deserves to be compensated in total of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Two lac fifty thousand) along with cost of litigation.
The complainant herself in her affidavited statement in Para-5 stated that despite her result of final year examination was published in daily news paper in which she was declared successful but neither her mark sheet nor certificate was delivered to her.Futher Para-9 of her statement she stated that despite lapse of more than five years her final year examination mark sheet and certificate of the course was not delivered as a result she is still unemployed and sustained physical harassment and mental agony during all these years and financial loss in total of Rs.2,50,000/-(Two lac fifty thousand).
C.W.1 has corroborated version of his daughter C.W.1.It is also evident from the record that the O.P’s have deliberately not appeared nor replied the allegation of the complainant which is an insult to its of its own student as well as a unpardonable negligency. This attitude of the O.P’s which is a premier educational institution of the state is unfortunate. We, find that loss of more than five years of a student life sand Carrere by thenegligent act of opposite parties cannot be repaired in term of money, however in the facts of circumstance and taking in to the consideration of the totality of the case ,we are of the view that itwill be expedientand justice will be met, if the complainant is awarded a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rs. two lac fifty thousand ) against O.P’sbesides complainant is also entitled to cost of litigation of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand). Against O.P’s. The opposite parties in the facts of this case are jointly and severally liable.
In the result,
O R D E R E D
That the case be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the opposite parties. Therefore we directed O.P’s to pay Rs.2,50,000/- (Two lac fifty thousand)to the complainant as compensation for mental and physical agony andloss of five years of her life, loss of propective job from the date of this order i.e 13.08.2018 till its payment. Further O.P’s are directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-(Five thousand)to the complainant. The opposite parties are also directed to deliver 3rd and final year mark sheet and certificate of the Add-on certificate course in computer application of the complainant Swati Dutta within 30 days.
The order must be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which O.P’s are liable to pay interest @14% perannum on the awarded amount and they are also liable for legal action as contemplated U/S 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
The office clerk is directed to furnish copy of this order to the parties or their advocate free of cost.
This case, is thus disposed accordingly.
