DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH [Complaint Case No:56 of 2010] Date of Institution : 28.01.2010 Date of Decision : 24.10.2011 Ms. Rachita Nagpal D/o Sh. Sanjiv Nagpal R/o H.No.3015, Sector 35-D, Chandigarh. ---Complainant. V E R S U S 1. Managing Committee, Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology, Ram Nagar (Near Banur) through its Chairman having main office, S.C.O. No.51-52, Sector 20-C, Chandigarh. 2. Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology, Ram Nagar (Near Banur) through its Principal. ---Opposite Parties. BEFORE: SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SMT. MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER SH. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU MEMBER Argued By: Sh. K. S. Chahal, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Harinder Kumar, Advocate and sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate for OP No.2. OP No.1 already exparte. PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Ms. Rachita Nagpal has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OP be directed to:- i) Refund a sum of Rs.45,980/- paid as fee. ii) Pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. iii) Pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation. iv) Award any other relief which the Forum deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she got admission in Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology in Degree Course of Computer Science Engineering and deposited Rs.45,980/- as fee vide receipt dated 09.06.2009 (Annexure C-1). It has been averred that on 10.06.2009, she also got admission in another college nearby her residence and deposited the requisite fee. The complainant immediately approached the OP College on 11.06.2009 and sought refund of her fee along with the original documents but to no avail. Thereafter, she served a legal notice dated 18.6.2009 followed by an application dated 24.6.2009 for refund of the fee. According to the complainant, when no refund was made to her, she again served a legal notice dated 07.10.2009 upon the OPs but to no effect. According to the complainant, non refund of the fee by the OPs amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. In these circumstances, the present complaint has been filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. Summons were sent to OP No.1 through registered post. None appeared on behalf of OP No.1 despite service. Therefore, OP No.1 was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 12.07.2011. 4. In the reply filed by OP No.2, it has been admitted that the complainant was given admission in OP College in Computer Science Engineering and she deposited the fee of Rs.45,980/- vide receipt No.917 dated 09.06.2009. It has been denied that the complainant approached it for refund of her fee on 11.06.2009, as alleged by her. According to OP No.2, the complainant approached it only on 24.06.2009 (Annexure C-3) and surrendered the seat on that very date. It has been asserted that she left the course midway. According to OP No.2, the complainant is not at all entitled for the refund of the fee under A.I.C.T.E. Rules as the seat vacated by her remained vacant for whole of the session. According to OP No.2, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record very carefully. 6. Admittedly, the complainant had taken admission in Computer Science Engineering in OP College and had deposited an amount of Rs.45,980/- as fee for the said course. It is also not disputed that the complainant left the course and sought refund of fee from the OP College vide letter dated 24.06.2009. 7. The relevant instructions issued by A.I.C.T.E vide Advt. No.AICTE/ DPC/03(01)/2008 to the Technical Institutions, Universities including deemed to be Universities imparting technical education regarding matters concerning charges of fees, refund of fees and other student related issues is reproduced as under: - “In the event of student/candidate withdrawing before the 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.1,000/- (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.” 8. The case of OP No.2 is that as the seat left by the complainant remained vacant for whole of the session, she is not entitled to the refund of the fee deposited by her. No documentary evidence has been placed on record by the OP college to prove that the seat vacated by the complainant remained vacant for whole of the session. Therefore, OP college is liable to refund the fee as per U.G.C. Guidelines. 9. It is pertinent to mentioned here that the complainant has also failed to place on record any document/letter written to OPs prior to 24.06.2009. Admittedly, she surrendered her seat and sought refund of the fee and original documents vide letter dated 24.06.2009 (Annexure C-3). Thus, it is proved that she attended the OP college for few days and left the course midway. Therefore, she is entitled for the refund of the fee with proportionate deductions of monthly fee, as per U.G.C. Guidelines. OP Institute is also entitled to deduct Rs.1,000/- as administration charges as per UGS Guidelines. In addition to this, the complainant is entitled for compensation for physical harassment and agony, which she suffered at the hands of the OPs Institute. 10. In view of the foregoing discussion, the present complaint is allowed. The OPs are, jointly and severally, directed to refund the entire amount deposited by the complainant after deducting Rs.1,000/- as administrative charges and the proportionate fee for the period of one month from the amount deposited by her with OP Institute vide Receipt dated 09.06.2009 (Annexure C-1). The Complainant is also entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and litigation charges amounting to Rs.7,000/-. 11. The aforesaid order be complied with by the OP jointly and severally, within a period of one month from the receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall pay the above said amount (excluding cost of litigation) along with interest @12% per annum from the date of complainant making application for refund i.e.24.06.2009, till the date of realization, along with the cost of litigation mentioned above. 12. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 24th October, 2011. Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER Sd/- (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU) MEMBER Ad/-
[Complaint Case No:56 of 2010] Present: None. --- The case was reserved on 20.10.2011. As per separate detailed order of even date, this complaint has been allowed. After compliance file be consigned. Announced. 24.10.2011 Member President Member
| | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MR. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER | | 
