4.   The complaint was resisted by the OP on the ground that the request for withdrawal of admission and refund of fee was received through speed post on 04.08.2009 after the final round of counseling was already over on 03.08.2009 and as such the seat vacated by the complainant remained vacant throughout the semester. No waiting list of students was prepared and whatever seats could be filled up were filled by candidates who reported for counseling on 03.08.2009. OP submitted that the vacant seats were subsequently filled on 09.01.2010 on the basis of the merit in the competitive examination for the second semester.

5.      The District Forum after considering the submissions of both the parties allowed the complaint vide its order dated 25.8.2010 as under:

 “In the result we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.82,425/- (88925-1000-Rs.5500/- already refunded vide cheque No.084479) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till payment with anther sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation inclusive of costs for harassment, inconvenience and mental torture within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.”

8.      The complaint was resisted by the OP on the ground that the request for refund was received by the OP only on 11.08.2009 i.e. much after the last date of counselling held on 03.08.2009 and the seat vacated by the complainant remained unfilled for the entire semester as there was no waiting list of candidates.

9.      The District Forum after considering the submissions of both the parties allowed the complaint vide its order dated 25.8.2010 as under: “In the result we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.82,725/- (89225-1000- Rs.5500/- already refunded vide cheque No.084481) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till payment with anther sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation inclusive of costs for harassment, inconvenience and mental torture within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.”

 10.  Aggrieved with the order of the District Forum, the OP Thapar University preferred Appeal No.519 of 2011 before the State Commission which was dismissed vide order dated 18.4.2011. Hence the present revision petition.

 R.P. No.2746 of 2012

11.  In 2008, the complainant was admitted for B.Tech.(Computer Science) in the OP University. The complainant deposited Rs.95, 920/ inclusive of hostel fee/mess security. However, the complainant left the University on 14.08.2008 to join another College. The complainant sought refund of the entire fee paid by him but only Rs.11,500/- was refunded and vide letter dated 30.08.2008 refused to refund the remaining amount on the ground that the seat vacated by the complainant remained unfilled.   The complainant however alleged that the said seat was filled by OP and thus the complainant was entitled to the refund. Aggrieved by this act of the OP University, the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum bearing No.CC/10/280.

22. The complaint was resisted by the OP on the ground that the Complainant’s seat was vacated only on 25.08.2009, i.e. only after the last counselling was held on 03.08.2009. Hence, in the light of the conditions provided in the prospectus at Pg. 21 vide item No. 11.6, the complainant was only entitled to the refund of the University security, caution money and alumni fee as the seat vacated by him remained unfilled.

23.    The District Forum after considering the submissions of both the parties allowed the complaint vide its order dated 25.8.2010 as under:

          “In the result we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.46,375/- (88925-37050/-) being the proportionate deductions of monthly fees form July, 2009 to 16.9 .2009 + 5500/- already refunded vide cheque No.089356) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till payment with anther sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation inclusive of costs for harassment, inconvenience and mental torture within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.”

 24.   Aggrieved with the order of the District Forum, the OP Thapar University preferred Appeal No.2059 of 2010 before the State Commission which was dismissed vide order dated 4.5.2012. Hence the present revision petition.

R.P. No.2749 of 2012.

 25.   The Complainant got admitted in BIOTECH branch of the OP vide Admission letter dated 03.03.2009. The candidate deposited a sum of Rs. 1,07,425/- (Rs. 1,03,925/- as admission fee and other misc. charges plus Rs. 3,500/- for mess) on 03.08.2009. However, the complainant got admission in another college, hence he sought refund of Rs. 1,03,925/- on 18.09.2009. the OP refunded only Rs. 5,000/-. Repeated requests for refund of the remaining amount fell on deaf ears. Aggrieved by this act of the OP University, the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum bearing No.CC/09/1049. 26.   The complaint was resisted by the OP on the ground that only Rs. 5,500/- was refundable to the complainant as the complainant withdrew from the admission after the last counselling held on 03.08.2009 and the seat vacated by the complainant remained vacant for the whole of the semester.                                                   27.    The District Forum after considering the submissions of both the parties allowed the complaint vide its order dated 25.8.2010 as under:

          “In the result we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.54247/- (102425-42678/- being the proportionate deductions of monthly fees form July, 2009 to 18.9.2009 - 5500/- already refunded vide cheque No.42985 dated 13.10.2009  to the complainant) alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till payment with anther sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation inclusive of costs for harassment, inconvenience and mental torture within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.”                                                                                                  28.   Aggrieved with the order of the District Forum, the OP Thapar University preferred Appeal No.2060 of 2010 before the State Commission which was dismissed vide order dated 4.5.2012. Hence the present revision petition.

29.    Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for all the respondents except in R.P. No. 2746 and 2748 of 2012 wherein the respondents were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 11.3.2013.                                                                                                30.    The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in all these cases, the refund was applied for after the last date of counseling and the seats vacated by these respondents/students remained vacant throughout the year/semester and hence, the petitioner University is entitled to retain the whole fees. However, the petitioner University has already refunded some appropriate amount in all the cases looking at the difficulty faced by the students. The learned counsel drew attention to the  guidelines of the AICTE and UGC in this regard which read as under:

 “14.xxxxxxxxxxxThe AICTE had issued instructions/Public Notice on 19.4.2007 to all the Technical Institutions, Universities including deemed Universities imparting technical education regarding matters concerning charging of fees, refund of fees and other student related issues as under:-

First Appeal No.60 of 2010 4"All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) has been empowered interalia under section 10(n) of AICTE Act to "take all necessary steps to prevent commercialization of technical education". In compliance with the provisions under AICTE Act and in the light of directions of Govt. of India issued under section 20(1) of AICTE Act vide Letter No.(U.1(A) Section), it has been decided to issue instructions to the Technical Institutions, Universities including Deemed to be Universities imparting Technical Education in the matters concerning students.

Whereas it has come to the notice of the AICTE that Technical Institutions and Universities including Deemed to be Universities, are admitting students to technical education programmes long before the actual starting of an academic session; collecting full fee from the admitted students; and, retaining their school/institution's leaving certificates in original;

And whereas Institutions and Universities are also reportedly confiscating the fee paid if a student fails to join by such dates; And, whereas, certificates in original are being detained by institutions and Universities to force retention of admitted students; And, whereas the time-limit for students to join the courses/programmes is also being advanced in some cases unrealistically so as to pre-empt students/candidates from exercising other options of joining other institutions of their choice.First Appeal No.60 of 2010 5

In the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course, the wait listed candidates should be given admissions against the vacant seat. The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) shall be refunded and returned by the Institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme. It would not be permissible for Institutions and Universities to retain the School/Institution leaving certificates in original. Should a student leave after joining the course and if the seat consequently falling vacant has been filled by another candidate by the last date of admission, the Institution must return the fee collected with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where applicable.

Any violation of instructions issued by AICTE, shall call for punitive action including withdrawal of approval and recognition of erring institutions and Universities. AICTE shall on its own or on receipt of specific complaints from those affected take all such steps as may be necessary to enforce these directions."

15.    Similarly the University Grants Commission had also issued Public Notice on 23.4.2007 as under:-

                                    " PUBLIC NOTICE

It has come to the notice of the University Grants Commission (UGC) that institutions and Universities including institutions Deemed to be Universities are admitting First Appeal No.60 of 2010 6 students to various programmes of studies long before the actual starting of academic session, collecting full fee from the admitted students, and, retaining their schools/institutions leaving certificates in original. The institutions and Universities are also reportedly confiscating the fee paid if a student fails to join by such dates. The Commission is of the view that the institutions/Universities, by way of retaining the certificate in original, force retention of admitted students which limits the opportunities for the candidates from exercising other options of joining other institutions of their choice. However, it would not be permissible for institutions and Universities to retain the school/institutions leaving certificate, mark sheets, caste certificate and other documents in original.

The Ministry of Human Resource Development and University Grants Commission have considered the issue and decided that the institutions and Universities, in the public interest, shall maintain a waiting list of students/candidates in the event of student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course, the wait-listed candidate 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.1,000(one thousand only) shall be refunded and returned by the institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme. Should a student leave after joining the course and if the seat consequently falling vacant has been filled by another candidate by the last date of admission, the institution must First Appeal No.60 of 2010 7 return the fee collected with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where applicable.

The Universities/Institutions are requested to abide by the instructions issued by the UGC. The UGC shall on its own or on receipt of specific complaints from those affected, take all such steps as may be necessary to enforce these directions. Institutions/Universities are also required to convey these instructions to the college affiliated to them. "

31.    The learned counsel argued that the guidelines of AICTE and UGC only stipulate that if the student applies before the last date of counseling for refund of fees and the seat is filled by the waiting list, then the whole fees after deducting  Rs.1,000/- shall be  refunded.  However, in the present cases, the students have applied after the last date of counseling and in some cases even after attending the classes for some time. In all these cases, the vacated seats could not be filled by any student as there cannot be any waiting list after the last date of counseling.

32.    On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent appearing in RP No. 2415/2011 stated that the admission letter sent to the respondent itself shows that the student was asked that he can deposit the document till 4.8.2009. The student sent his application for withdrawal of admission and refund by speed post on 2.9.2009 which was received by the University on 4.8.2009. Thus, it has reached on time to the University and thus University should have refunded the whole fees after deducting Rs.1,000/- as per the guidelines of AICTE and UGC. The learned counsel further argued that it is only to check these types of University/Deemed University, that ICTE and UGC have come out with the detailed guidelines in this regard.  Thus, the respondent is entitled for refund of full fees.

33.    The learned counsel for respondent appearing in R.P. No. 2416/2011 stated that the respondent applied for refund on 26.7.2009 after seeing news items stating that the Deemed University status of the petitioner was going to be de-recognized/withdrawn. Thus, the respondent applied sufficiently before the last date of counseling which was 3.8.2009. However, the University is claiming that they received this request only on 11.8.2009 i.e. after the date of last counseling. The learned counsel further argued that if a student comes to know  that his future would be wasted because the deemed university status of the petitioner was going to be cancelled, then who will study in  that university and therefore, there was a genuine  reason for withdrawing from the admission and asking for refund. No delay was made by the respondent in applying for such refund.                 34.          Respondent in RP No.2746/2012 has been proceeded ex-arte on 11.3.2013. Learned counsel for respondent in RP No.2747/2012 argued that he agrees with the arguments advanced by learned counsel in RP No. 2415 and 2416 of 2011 that as per the guidelines of AICTE and UGC the petitioner University is liable to refund the whole amount except for Rs.1,000/-. The learned counsel stated that the fees was deposited on 30.7.2006. However, the request for refund was made on 31.8.2006 as the complainant had got admission in another Engineering College.The learned counsel mentioned that the guidelines of AICTE clearly states that all Universities shall permit such withdrawal so as to enable students to take admission in the institute of their choice.   The respondent in RP No.2748/2012 is also proceeded ex-parte on 11.3.2013. The learned counsel for the respondent in RP No.2749 of 2012 did not appear for arguments. However, proxy counsel on  his behalf appeared who agreed with the arguments advanced by learned counsel  appearing in other revision petitions.                                                                                                      35.   I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by all the parties and have examined the material on record. Each revision petition has been separately examined as below.

 Discussion and Findings:

R.P. No. 2415

36.    Here, the complained has applied for refund before the last date of counselling and the last date given to him for depositing the documents was 4.8.2009 and his application reached the O.P. on