Advocate Nilesh Bhandari for the complainant
Advocate R. S. Samant for the Opponent No.1
Advocate V. R. Jambhekar for the Opponent No.2
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Per Hon’ble Shri. V. P. Utpat, President
:- JUDGMENT :-
Date – 5th April 2013
This complaint is filed by student against College and University for deficiency in service. Brief facts are as follows-
[1] Complainant applied for admission for B.Sc (Nursing) 1st year in the College of Opponent No.1 through spot round. It is alleged by him that he is belonging to OBC category. At the time of admission he was not holding caste validity certificate hence he had given undertaking on stamp of Rs.100/- stating the he will produce the caste validity certificate to the college well in time. He had supplied the application which was submitted for Caste Verification Scrutiny committee. It is the case of the complainant that as per the directions of the Opponent No.1 he had filed the said affidavit and when it was disclosed by the Opponent No.2 i.e. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences that he is not eligible for appearing for final examination. He was not informed accordingly. According to the complainant as his right to appear for final examination is withheld by the opponents that amount to deficiency in service. He has prayed for directing opponents to allow him to appear for the said examination and he has also claimed compensation of Rs.4,75,000/- for mental and physical sufferings as well as costs of Rs.25,000/- for the present proceeding.
[2] The Opponent No.1 hnd filed affidavit and gave reply to the complaint on 8/11/2012. The Opponent No.1 has filed written version as well as affidavit alongwith all relevant documents on 4/10/2012. Both parties have denied contents of complaint in toto. It is flatly denied that the assurance was given by opponent for the admission for the said course. It is the case of opponents that as complainant has failed to produce caste validity certificate within stipulated time his admission was categorically cancelled as per the rules of University. The complainant was aware about consequences as regards the non production of validity certificate. Hence he is not entitled for any relief as well as compensation for mental and physical sufferings. Both parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
[3] After scrutinizing documentary evidence on record and considering the pleadings as well as argument of both counsel following points arise for my determination. The points, findings and reasons thereon are as follows-
Sr.No. | POINTS | FINDINGS |
1 | Whether complainant is entitled for the relief of appearance of examination as alleged by him ? | In the negative |
2 | Whether complainant is entitled for compensation for mental and physical sufferings ? | In the affirmative |
3 | What order ? | Complaint is partly allowed |
REASONS -
The learned Advocate for the complainant argued before me that the Opponent No.1 promised the complainant to give admission for the said course in spot round and he had filed affidavit as per the directions of the Opponent No.1 and he believed that his admission is confirmed. It is also argued that the complainant was allowed to attend the classes of the said course. His fee for gymkhana, tution and hostel to the tune of Rs.17,000/- was received by the Opponent No.1. It is also pointed out that the complainant has produced the relevant documents showing that he applied for caste validity certificate but due to the inefficiency of the department he could not get validity certificate within stipulated time. Hence he is entitled for appearance for final examination.
The learned Advocate for the Opponent No.2 argued before me that as per the rules of Maharashtgra University of Health Sciences the admission for the candidates from reserve category is confirmed only on production of caste validity certificate. It is specifically mentioned in the rules that if the said certificate is not produced alongwith admission form that admission cannot be accepted. It reveals from the record that inspite of these rules the opponent No.1 i.e. College has not informed the complainant immediately and cancelled his admission. It further reveals from the record that the college has allowed to admit the said candidate on the basis of filing of affidavit. The Medical Education and Drugs Department, Government of Maharashtra provided certain rules and also proforma of undertaking. In my opinion the said undertaking cannot be considered in the present proceeding as the present admission of the complainant is based upon spot round. It is also argued on behalf of the complainant that he had requested for changing his admission from OBC quota to Defence quota. But that change was not made by the complainant within stipulated period. Hence University did not accept it. It reveals from the record that college has cancelled the admission of the complainant in the month of July 2013. This indicates that career of the complainant was lingering for the period of one year and due to cancellation of his admission he was frustrated and suffered lot of physical as well as mental sufferings. This Forum has no jurisdiction to allow the complainant for appearing for the examination as that is not the subject matter as regards deficiency in service. Hence the relief for allowing the complainant for appearing for the examination cannot be granted. However it reveals from the record that due to the false promise and assurance of Opponent No.1 one academic year of the complainant was lost. Hence he is entitled for adequate compensation from the Opponent No.1. In my opinion if the Opponent No.1 is directed to pay lumpsum compensation of Rs.25,000/- for loss of one academic year, fees paid by him and costs of the proceeding that would meet the ends of justice. I answer points accordingly and pass the following order –
:- ORDER :-
1. Complaint is partly allowed as against the Opponent No.1.
2. The prayer of the complainant as regards allowing him for appearing for final examination is rejected.
3. It is hereby declared that the Opponent No.1 has caused deficiency in service by giving false promise to the complainant as regards admission to the B.Sc (Nursing).
4. The Opponent No.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order.
5. Complaint is dismissed as against the Opponent No.2.
Copy of order be supplied to both the parties free of cost.
Place-Pune
Date- 05/04/2013
