In the Court of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata, 8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087. CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 148 / 2006 1) Sri Mukesh Kumar Singh, B-3, River Side Quarters, Birlapur, 24 Parganas (S). ---------- Complainant ---Verses--- 1) NIIT Ltd., 7, Camac Street, Kolkata-700017. ---------- Opposite Party Present : Sri S. K. Majumdar, President. Sri T.K. Bhattachatya, Member. Order No. 2 1 Dated 1 6 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 9 . 1. The instant case arises out of the petition of complaint filed by Mukesh Kumar Singh, B-3, Riverside Quarters, Birlapur, 24 Parganas (S) on 8.6.06 u/s 12 of C.P. act, 1986 against NIIT Ltd., 2nd floor, Azimgunj House, 7, Camac Street, Kolkata-17 with a prayer to (a) refund of his total course fee of Rs.56,000/- for GNIIT with interest and (b) pay compensation amounting to Rs.9,00,000/- for the loss of his good will, faith and promotion affecting his whole career. 2. Specific case is that the complainant registered himself for the one year course (HNC) at NIIT, Minto Park Centre in the month of June, 1997 having the Registration No.8503-00-083 (annex-1). Just before the completion of his above course, his faculty Sri Rajarshee Bagchi insisted him to go for the three year’s course (GNIIT) since after completion of the said course, the institution would assist him to get a service having a minimum salary of Rs.6500/-. Though it was a verbal assurance, the complainant relied on his faculty and upgraded his registration for the three years course of (GNIIT) (annex-4 & 5). The complainant completed four semesters (E,F,G,H) in the month of June, 1999 and was waiting for the 3rd year’s final semester, i.e. Professional Practice (PP) which NIIT was supposed to arrange for the students. But the complainant received two interview calls having only one vacancy in each and NIIT sent thirty students for that single seat. Unfortunately, the complainant could not make it and he informed the centre accordingly. The o.p. assured the complainant that they would arrange for other interviews. But the complainant did not get any interview after the aforesaid two interviews and he was told that P.P. couldn’t be allotted to a student who was above 25 years of age (annex-6). The complainant then met Smt. Ratna Mitra, the authority responsible at that time, who advised him to go for a one month fast track course on JAVA as this would help him to get the P.P. The complainant abide by her advise and went for this latest course and got the certificate for the same and found it useless to help him to get the P.P. 3. The complainant stated in his petition of complaint that his company supported him to do the course by giving him permission to leave the office two hours earlier on class days for consecutive two years. 4. Since December, 2005, the head of the Deptt. of the complainant demanded the complainant to produce the certificate of the course of JAVA course as they were planning to promote him with higher job responsibility. 5. The complainant then briefed all the situations to Mr. Swarup of Camac Street Centre as Minto Park centre was merged with it. The complainant urged for the P.P. But the o.p. replied that the giving of P.P. to the complainant was beyond their rule, as the said student was aged above 25 years. 6. But the question is that when the complainant took admission he was 28 years of age and at that age how was he admitted as a student of the course for which he was not eligible (annex-7). 7. The complainant out of exasperation requested the o.p. to issue two year’s certificate. But the o.p. told that two years certificate may be given provided the complainant gave an application for degradation of his course. The complainant did it under compulsion since he had to produce the certificate to the company by the end of February, 2006 (annex-7). 8. But the complainant has not got even his degraded course certificate for which he cleared the course and had the result of the same with him (annex-8). 9. Hence, the case is filed against the o.p. u/s 12 of C.P. Act, 1986. 10. Decision with reasons :- (a) Perused the petition of complaint, w/v, affidavit of examination-in-chief of complainant and o.p. and BNAs and documents on record. It is evident from the perusal of he above documents that the o.p. took money for the P.P. in advance. This apart, the o.p. admitted the complainant in their course at the age of 27+ years though according to their terms and conditions, the student must be less than 25 years of age at the start of P.P. (annex-N of evidence on affidavit of complainant vide terms and conditions 13.2). There is no evidence adduced by the o.p. to the effect that special sanction from Regional Industry Collaboration Head had given any sanction. In spite of the sanction, the o.p. admitted the complainant though he was over aged, which indicates nothing but resorting to unfair trade practices by the o.p. (b) This apart, it is a fact that the o.p. had received the money for the P.P. but they failed to make the placement of their successful students. There is no doubt to the fact that no money for a semester for P.P. could be taken from any successful student without ensuring their P.P., since it was the duty of the o.p. to ensure the P.P. of the successful student. Mere forwarding the students for interview is nothing but duping the student. (c) Again, the o.p. did not give the certificate for the completion of two years of GNIIT in spite of the request of the complainant (annex-F of affidavit of examination-in-chief of complainant). (d) The o.p. could not adduce any material evidence in support of their averments against the allegations brought by the complainant. 11. Hence, ordered that the o.p. is directed to (a) refund Rs.12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousand) only towards the course fee for the third year (P.P) which was not rendered, (b) pay compensation amounting to Rs.50,000/- (Rupee fifty thousand) only for depriving the complainant from his promotion owing to the o.p’s deficiency of service of not providing the certificate for two years training save P.P. and the o.p. is also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only. The above whole amount will be paid within thirty days from the date of communication of this order and in default, the whole amount will carry interest @ 10% p.a. till its full recovery. Fees paid are correct. The case is disposed of from this Forum. Supply certified copy of this order to the parties on receipt of prescribed fees. ___Sd-_______ ____Sd-_______ MEMBER PRESIDENT | 
