Punjab

StateCommission

A/11/263

Baba Farid College - Complainant(s)

Versus

Harsharanjeet Singh - Opp.Party(s)

Rajan Bansal

11 Feb 2015

ORDER

                                                               FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH

 

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,  PUNJAB

          SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.

                                     

                             First Appeal No.263 of 2011

 

                                                          Date of Institution: 07.02.2011  

                                                          Date of Decision : 11.02.2015

 

Baba Farid College of Engineering and Technology, Village Deon, Mukatsar Road, Bathinda through its Director Principal Dr.Jasbir Singh Hundal.

 

                                                          …..Appellant/Opposite Party

         

                                      Versus

 

Harsharanjeet Singh Nagpal son of Baldev Singh Nagpal, resident of 4, Green Enclave, Ferozepur City.

 

 

                                                          ….Respondent/Complainant

 

         

First Appeal against order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ferozepur

Quorum:-

 

          Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member.

          Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, Member.  

Present:-

 

          For the appellant              :         Sh.Rajan Bansal, Advocate

          For the respondents        :         Sh.Vinod Khunger, Advocate

 

          . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                            

J. S. KLAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

                                     

           The appellant (the OP in the complaint) has directed this appeal against the respondent of this appeal (the complainant in the complaint) challenging the order dated 30.11.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Ferozepur directing the appellant to refund a sum of Rs.16,258/-  along with interest @6% per annum, besides the payment for cost of litigation of Rs.2,000/-. The instant appeal has been preferred against the same by the OP now the appellant.

2.      The complainant has filed the complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the OP on the allegations that he took admission in the college of the OP in Civil Branch Batch 2009 bearing I.D No.2109011029 by depositing the requisite fee of Rs.38515/-, vide receipt no.221 dated 13.07.2009. The complainant chose to take admission at Adesh Institute of Engineering & Technology, Sadiq Road, Faridkot and he surrendered the seat with the OP/college to take his admission thereat. The complainant applied for refund of his fee with the OP and the OP/college sent registered letter dated 09.11.2009 to the complainant enclosing demand draft of Rs.21257/- against refund of fee deposited by him.  The complainant deposited fee of  Rs. 38,515/- with the OP and OP could deduct Rs.1000/- as processing fee out of the same at the time of surrender of the seat. The OP illegally withheld an amount of Rs. 17258/- of the complainant. The college of the OP is affiliated to the PTU Jalandhar. The counseling was held by PTU, Jalandhar on 17.07.2009 through CET Rank and no college was allotted to the complainant, in as much as stay was granted by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. Fourth counseling was held on 11.09.2009 by PTU, Jalandhar and complainant was allotted seat in Swami Vivekanand College, Banur, District Patiala. The complainant has not attended the college of OP due to above reasons. The complainant requested the OP to refund his fee and also served a legal notice on it on 1.12.2009 to this effect. The complainant has, thus, filed the consumer complaint against the OP directing it to refund the balance amount of Rs.16,528/- along with interest @ 18% per annum besides payment of compensation as Rs.50,000/- for mental harassment and Rs.2200/- as costs of litigation.

3.      Upon notice, the OP appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant vehemently. It was averred in the legal objection by the OP in the written reply that the territorial jurisdiction of District Forum of Ferozepur did not exist to entertain this complaint, inasmuch as college of the OP is not situated within the jurisdiction of District Forum Ferozepur. The present complaint is not maintainable and same has been filed with the object of vexing and harassing the OP. On merits, it was admitted that OP is an educational institute affiliated with PTU Jalandhar and bound by the rules and regulations framed by the said University. It was further admitted that complainant took admission in the institute through central counseling conducted by the PTU, Jalandhar, in which he was allotted branch of Civil Engineering at the institute of the opposite party. In July 2009, the complainant started attending classes up to 05.09.2009 and thereafter he continued remaining absent from the classes. On 24.09.2009, the complainant belatedly intimated the OP for his decision to surrender his seat on the ground that he had obtained admission in Swami Vivekanand College of Engineering and Technology, Banur through counseling conducted by PTU, Jalandhar. It was further pleaded that complainant cheated the OPs as he took direct admission in Adesh Institute of Engineering and Technology, Faridkot. It was averred by the OP that complainant had not joined the college of the OP and it was emphatically pleaded that he attended the classes of the OP up to 05.09.2009 and thereafter remained absent thereform up to 24.09.2009. Rule 12 is not applicable to the facts of the case and complainant is not entitled to refund of full fee after deduction of Rs.1000/- only. The cheque for Rs.21257/- has been sent to the complainant in a legal and valid manner, as refund of the fee. It was pleaded that the OP/college has been allotted 60 seats in Civil Engineering Branch, 10% additional seats given under a Fee Waiver Scheme by Punjab Government vide notification no.13/60/08-ITE  /3796 dated 27.08.2008. There were only 60 admissions of authorized intake, out of which four seats were surrendered leaving balance 56 under the above Waiver Scheme. Seat surrendered by the complainant remained unfilled, hence, he is not entitled to refund of the entire fee. Had the seat surrendered been unfilled by the complainant, it would have been a different matter. Thus, the OP is entitled to make proportionate deduction of monthly fee and, thus, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, photocopy of receipt dated 13.07.2009 for Rs.38515/- Ex.C-2, photocopy of postal receipt Ex.C-3, photocopy of registered letter Ex.C-4, the letter sent to the complainant vide no.964 dated 6.11.2009 Ex.C-5, photocopy of draft of Rs.21,257/- in favour of the complainant Ex.C-6, provisional letter of seat allotment Ex.C-7, result card Ex.C-8, identity check performa Ex.C-9, notice sent to the complainant Ex.C-10, photocopy of postal receipt Ex.C-11, call billing record Ex.C-12 and affidavit of Baldev Singh Nagpal Ex.C-13. To counter this affidavit, the OP tendered in evidence affidavit of Jasbir Singh Hundal, Principal of Baba Farid University, Bathinda Ex.R-1, letter from complainant to Principal Baba Farid University, Bathinda Ex.R-2, Counselling identity check proforma Ex.R-3, copy of instructions Ex.R-4, letter from Principal Baba Farid University, Bathinda to the Manager (Accounts), Accounts Section, Bathinda Ex.R-5 of Rs.21257/- to complainant. Other documents Ex.R-6 to Ex.R-9 have also been placed on the record in this regard. On conclusion of evidence and arguments, the District Forum, Ferozepur accepted the complaint of the complainant and directed the OP to refund a sum of Rs.16258/- to the complainant along with interest @6% per annum from the date of surrender of seat till its actual payment, besides costs of litigation as Rs.2000/-. Dissatisfied with this order dated 30.11.2010 District Forum, Ferozepur. OP now appellant has preferred this appeal against the same.

5.      We have heard learned counsel for the parties and also examined the record of the case.   The submission raised by counsel for the appellant in this case is that complainant took the admission in the college of the OP in the month of July 2009 and attended the classes up to 05.09.2009. The complainant intimated the OP regarding his decision to surrender the seat on account of taking admission in Swami Vivekanand College of Engineering and Technology, Tehsil Banur, District Patiala through conunselling conducted by the PTU, Jalandhar and applied for refund of the fee. The submission is that complainant took admission in Adesh Institute of Engineering and Technology, Faridkot directly and thereby defrauded the OP. The complainant has not intimated the OP prior to 24.09.2009 to surrender his seat.  It was also contended Rule 12 as framed by the University would not be of any help to the complainant. It was contended that if seat sequently fell vacant and has been filled by another candidate by the last date of admission, institute must have to refund the fee collected with proportionate deduction thereon. Our attention has been drawn to Rule 12 in this case, which is reproduced as under :

          "12, RULES FOR ADUSTMENT/REFUND OF FEES

                     In case a student surrenders his/her seat within seven  days of the end of the online counseling, he/she must        submit application to the college and register online on    PTU website www.ptu.ac.in. PTU shall only forward       such            cases to the concerned colleges/Universities and    colleges must refund his/her full fee deduction of       Rs.1000/- only. The surrender of seat thereafter shall be                    governed by notification regarding refund of fee issued by AICTE vide letter No.AICTE/Legal 04(01)2007 shall         be followed  strictly."

6.       In the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before starting of the course, the wait-listed candidates should be given admission against the vacant seat. The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs.1000/-. The institutes cannot retain the certificate of candidate as per circular vide Ex.R-8 and Ex.R-9 on the record. The circulars, notification issued by the University Grant Commission have overriding effect over the University's own guidelines, as per the observation of the District Forum relying upon, latest law laid down in Revision Petition No.3926 of 2009 decided on July, 6, 2010 case titled as "The Registrar Andhra University Vishkhapatham, Andhra Pradesh & other ..Versus.. Janjanam Jagedeesh" of the Hon'ble National Commission.

7.      The submission of the OP now appellant is that complainant attended the classes with them and thereafter abruptly left the classes. The complainant has not admitted this fact on the record.  The OPs are required to substantiate this fact on record to this effect. Vide affidavit Ex.R-1 of Jasbir Singh Hundal, Principal of OP, he reiterated the statement in his affidavit on the record that complainant attended the classes and thereafter left the same midway. Ex.R-2 is letter of complainant to Principal for refund of his fee, Ex.R-3 is counseling identity check Performa by PTU Jalandhar to the effect that fee is to be paid by 17.09.2009 in this counseling in the name of the complainant and the institute allotted to him was Swami Vivekanand College of Engineering and Technology, Banur. Ex.R-4 is document containing Rule 12 which is axiomatic from Rule 12 that if students left his seat within 7 days at the end of the online counseling, he must submit application to the college .Ex.R-5 is refund sent to the complainant for Rs.21,257/- only. Ex.R-6 and Ex.R-7 are photocopies of the management quota and affiliation order. Ex.R-8 and Ex.R-9 are public notice on the record.  We, thus, conclude from perusal of the above-referred evidence that the OP could not substantiate it on the record that the complainant attended the classes with them up till 05.09.2009 and thereafter remained absent from the classes abruptly. As per pleadings of the complainant on the record, counseling with PTU, Jalandhar was finally held on 11.09.2009 on the basis of the CET Rank policy. We cannot, thus, infer that complainant attended the classes when the counseling was finally concluded by the PTU, Jalandhar on 11.09.2009. The complainant applied for refund of fee to the OPs in this case vide Ex.R-1 on the record. The provisional letter of seat allotment Ex.C-7 of PTU Jalandhar is on the record issued in favour of the complainant. A candidate has option to move to another other college uptil last and final counseling was held by the PTU Jalandhar. OP had failed to establish on the record that the complainant attended any classes with them and thereafter abruptly left them. The complainant attended the final counseling on 11.09.2009 of PTU, Jalandhar and process for admission was continuing up to 11.09.2009. The complainant applied for refund of fee only on 24.09.2010 within 12 days of the last counseling attendance. The admission process in the college of the OP was in progress at that time and teaching classes would have started after counseling was over. There is no substance on the record by the OPs that seat left by the complainant remained vacant. The affidavit of Jasbir Singh Hundal, Principal of OP is Ex.R-1 is on the record. He has nowhere stated in his affidavit that seat remained vacant as surrendered by the complainant and consequently it suffered loss. There is no substance established on the record by the OPs to explain the basis of reduction of the admission fee of the complainant. The OPs were entitled to deduct Rs.1000/- only as per guidelines and circulars when the last counseling was finally concluded by PTU, Jalandhar on 11.09.09 and process of admission was then going on.

8.       In view of our above referred discussion, we concur with the finding of the District Forum in this case. The order of the District Forum does not suffer from any illegality or material infirmity in our opinion calling for any interference therein. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant is devoid of any merit and same is hereby dismissed.

9.      The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.9130/- at the time of filing the appeal. This amount with interest, if any, accrued thereon be refunded by the registry to the respondent/complainant by way of crossed cheque/demand draft after  45 days from receipt of copy of this order. Remaining amount shall also be paid to respondent/complainant by the appellant as per order of the District Forum within 45 days from receipt of the copy of this order.

10.     Arguments in this appeal were heard on 09.02.2015 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties.

11.     The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

 

                                                                          (J. S. KLAR)

                                                             PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

                       

                                                                   (VINOD KUMAR GUPTA)

                                                                          MEMBER

 

February, 11    2015.                                                               

(ravi)