Order-12.
Date-12/02/2018.
Smt. Sangita Paul, Member.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this complaint states that on completion of the programme complainant knocked the door of the so called dedicated placement cell of the institution only with the hope to meet his career aspirations. Each time they assured to extend all sorts of assistance for a proper placement. But in reality they did nothing.
Complainant pleaded for several times to the placement cell over telephone, each time they assured complainant to extend all sorts of cooperation for a placement. Even they distinctly told complainant over telephone to communicate his choice so that they could provide complainant with so called 100 percent assistance to get his cherished job. But in reality they did nothing to guide him through proper path so that he can reach his destination. It is considered to be jugglery with the dreams of an unemployed youth. Complainant thinks that it is a serious offence.
After a lapse of eight months complainant took the matter to the Consumer Affairs Department, Govt. of West Bengal for a solution. They took prompt action and asked Indian School of Business Administration to take action in this regard. That on receipt of a letter from the Consumer Affairs department, Govt. of W.B. the aforesaid Institute asked complainant to submit his C.V. what complainant expected was proper guidance from the so called dedicated placement cell. Complainant only wanted to keep him informed about the requirements and developments in different sectors regarding the career opportunities available. According to complainant only submission of C.V. cannot serve the purpose. In this circumstance complainant prays for refund of course fee of Rs.9006/- (Rupees Nine Thousand Six only). He also prays for directing the O.Ps. to give compensation of Rs.90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand only) for mental agony and harassment. Complainant also prays for 100 percent placement assistance.
The O.P. states in his written version that the complaint is false, frivolous, baseless and not maintainable. The complainant is not a consumer under the provisions laid down in the Consumer Protection Act,1986. Complainant has not hired any service from the O.P. against payment of consideration for placement. Complainant has no cause of action for filing the present complaint. Indian School of Business Management & Administration conducts various diploma and advance diploma courses. It assists the students to find placement. The placement is not guaranteed by the institute. No part of the prospectus guarantees 100 percent placement of all the students of the institute.
Complainant passed diploma in business management and mark-sheet was issued. The institute forwarded the C.V. of complainant to various companies. The institute assured complainant to revert as soon as any offer from any company is received for the complainant. The institute is yet to receive any placement option for complainant, no revert was made to complainant. It is significant to mention that the fees paid by complainant was towards the diploma course which the institute duly imparted and complainant has no grievance with regard to the same. So question of deficiency of service does not arise. The institute never guaranteed 100 percent placement. The institute provides assistance to the students in searching placement by forwarding their CVs to various companies and making follow ups with such companies. However the placement of any student depends upon his merit. The institute being a reputed institute many students get placement in reputed companies. The Institute has forwarded CV of complainant to various companies. However the vacancies are not opened for the course done by complainant. As a result complainant could not receive any placement offer. The institute did not play any jugglery with dreams of complainant. It is evident that much prior to the filing of complaint the institute forwarded the CV of complainant to various companies. Still the institute is providing all assistance to complainant to secure the placement.
Complainant is not entitled to get refund of the course fee or the institute cannot give 100 percent guarantee towards placement or any compensation and complainant has failed to make out any case of deficiency in service. O.P. prays for dismissing the complaint with exemplary cost.
Ld. Lawyer of O.P. also submits in the hearing that the Institute will give 100 percent placement assistance. There was no guarantee for providing job. O.P. has taken initiative but their requirement does not match with complainant’s bio data. Those students who have secured the job have fulfilled the criteria of the companies. As complainant’s original mail ID is not known to the O.P., O.P. could not send mail in the complainant’s address.
Decision with Reasons
On overall evaluation of complaint petition, written version, evidence-in-chief and other materials on record, it is evident that complainant Mr. Olive Roy is a job aspirant. He was admitted to an institution viz. Indian School of Business Management & Administration and undertook Diploma in Business Management (DBM) from the said institute and passed on 03/10/2016. The course fee was Rs.9006/-. The payment was made on 27/10/2015. But it is very unfortunate that the complainant failed to crack the job. Still he is looking after a suitable job. The institute declared that 100 percent placement assistance will be given. The Institute will send CV of complainant to many companies, if their requirement matches with complainant’s bio-data they will inform complainant. The OPs in their version state that they have sent complainant’s bio-data to many companies, but companies did not call complainant for interview. Complainant fails to understand 100 percent placement assistance is not guarantee for getting a job. Complainant informed Consumer Affairs Deptt. On 03-04-2017 the Department asked the Institute to submit his version. On 25-05-2017, the Department of Consumer Affairs wrote complainant to submit his version. But the mediation OP submitted their version failed.
The OP’s case is that complainant cannot lodge complaint in Consumer Forum. But it is to be mentioned that training institute is not an educational institution and students at educational institutions are not entitled to lodge case in Consumer Forum against Educational Institutions. But the training centre, as such, is not a UGC affiliated educational Institution. This Institution does not impart B.Sc., B.Com. Degrees. It is purely a Professional Institute where job aspirants are admitted for receiving training. Hence, it will not be regarded as a degree college. The students of college/university cannot lodge complaint in Consumer Forum. In this case, complainant is not a college student. He received training from a Technical Institute. The Institute is not affiliated to the UGC. So, the rule is not applicable in the complainant’s case. Hence, it appears that the issue is not maintainable. Complainant can lodge complaint in the Forum.
Considering the condition of an unemployed youth it is clear that in this case, complainant did not get any job. It is also an admitted fact that complainant deposited Rs.9,006/- for training. Training was imparted by the Institute but complainant could not get any job. In the argument Ld. Lawyer of the OP stated that after successful completion of training, the OPs through several emails provided information regarding job. Complainant, on the other hand, stated that OP sent information not in complainant’s email address still the OPs stated that they have sent emails to complainant. At this juncture, it is not possible to determine the veracity of complainant’s and OP’s statement. It is not possible to determine facts by strict proof. It is not possible to establish by Evidence Act. As it may, considering the above facts and circumstances, as well as the admitted fact that he could not avail the interview or in other words, the opportunities allegedly sent by the OP through alleged email, we are of view that complainant is entitled to get at least a minimum cost of litigation and compensation.
In result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case No.271 of 2017 be and the same is allowed in part on contest with cost of Rs.5,000/-.
OPs are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for causing harassment and mental agony and sufferings to the complainant.
OPs are directed to comply the order within 30 days failing which the OPs are to pay fine at the rate ofRs.100/- per day delay and the amount so accumulated should be deposited to this Forum.
Failure to comply with the order will entitle the complainant to put the order into execution under appropriate provision of the C.P. Act.
