BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:HYDERABAD.

F.A.No.411/2006 AGAINSTPRAKASAM AT ONGOLE

Between:

The District Educational Officer,

Ongole.                                                                                                                        

And

1. Kasukurthy Shyam Babu

   JawaharCollege, Kavali

                                      2. The Principal, A.P.S.W.R.School,

3. The District Collector, Prakasam Dist.,

4. The Secretary, A.P.S.W.R.E.S.Society,

    Hyderabad.                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Counsel for the Appellant:   

Counsel for the Respondents: M/s.J.Subba Rao-R1.

QUORUM:THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT.

                     SMT.M.SHREESHA, LADY MEMBER.

FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH

TWO THOUSAND EIGHT

ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President.)

***

The case of the complainant in brief is that he appeared for 7^th     

Opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 namely, Principal, District Collector and Secretary resisted the case by filing a counter while admitting that the complainant was declared as winner, they stated that they were neither the sponserors nor sanctioning authorities and that it was the D.E.O. i.e. the appellant herein was competent authority for giving the said award. 22-11-2002

The appellant filed counter stating that opposite party No.1 sent his report that K.Chaitanya, got 529 marks under the said category and the name of the complainant was not sent to him.  

The complainant filed Exs.A1 to A7 while the appellant did not file any documents.

After considering the evidence placed on record, the District Forum opined that opposite party No.1, the Principal, sent wrong information to the appellant, and that made awarding of “Prathibha Award” to a third person, which was mistake done by both opposite parties 1 and 3 and therefore, they were directed to pay cash under the said certificate besides compensation of Rs.5,000/- together with costs of Rs.1,000/-. 

Aggrieved by the said decision, the District Educational Officer i.e. opposite party No.3 preferred this appeal contending that the District Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the case.  

At the outset, we may state that neither the appellant nor the Principal of the school, who did not prefer any appeal, against the order of the District Forum deny that the complainant belongs to SC/PHC and got 545 as against 600 marks and entitled to “Prathibha Award”. 22-11-2002 

The Principal of the school did not prefer any appeal, may be, as he was not presiding over the school on the date of filing of the complaint and          

In the result this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs.1,000/-.