JUSTICE V.K.JAIN, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

          An act to provide for establishment of Self-Financed Private University for imparting higher education and to regulate their functions etc. namely Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishv-Vidhyala (Stahpna aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2001 came to be passed by the State of Chhattisgarh.  In terms of Section 6(2) of the aforesaid Act, the University established Under Section 5(1), could, with the prior approval of the State Government affiliate any College or other institute or set up more than one campus.  The University set up an off-campus centre namely National Institute of Medical Science, which is the petitioner before this Commission, at Jaipur, without obtaining the prior approval of the State Government.  The complainant took admission in the BPT Course of the aforesaid institute and obtained the requisite fee etc.  Alleging that in June 2005, the complainant came to know that the institute had no approval/recognition for the aforesaid course, the complainant approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint seeking refund of the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- which she had paid to the petitioner alongwith compensation etc. 

2.      The complaint was resisted by the petitioner which admitted the admission taken by the complainant but pleaded that at the time of taking admission, the guardian had been informed and they knew it very well that the institute had been recognized by a private university namely Shri Rawatpura Sarkar International University.

3.      The District Forum directed the petitioner to refund the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- paid by the complainant to it.  Being aggrieved from the order of the District Forum, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal.  Since the complaint was also dissatisfied with the order passed by the District Forum, he also filed a separate appeal challenging the said appeal. 

4.      Vide impugned order dated 16.10.2017, the State Commission dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and partly allowed the appeal filed by the complainant by directing payment of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to him in addition to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the order.  Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition. 

5.      This is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant knew from the very beginning that the petitioner institute is recognized by Shri Rawatpura Sarkar International University and therefore, there was no misrepresentation made to him.  As noted earlier, u/s 6(2) of Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishv-Vidhyala (Stahpna aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2001, prior approval of the State was necessary for setting up an off-campus centre of a university.  Admittedly, no such permission was obtained by the petitioner institute before setting up this campus.  Therefore, there was a deficiency on the part of the petitioner in rendering services to the complainant who was not informed that the requisite approval of the State Government had not been obtained for setting up the said institute.  As a result, two precious years of the complainant were wasted and he suffered acute harassment and mental agony on account of the said act of the petitioner.  The order passed by the State Commission therefore, does not call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction.  The revision petition being devoid of any merits, is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.