DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

===

Isha Verma d/o Sh. Pawan Kumar, #28, Harmilap Nagar, Baltana, Zirakpur, District Mohali (Punjab).

…..Complainant

                V E R S U S

Principal, Goswami Ganesh Dutta Sanatan Dharama College (GGDSD), Sector 32, Chandigarh.

                      ……Opposite Party

CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL                    PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL       MEMBER

         DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by:     Sh.Pawan Kumar, Authorized Representative of Complainant

Sh.Rohit Dheer, Counsel for OP.

                ---

PER P.D.GOEL,PRESIDENT

         The complainant has filed the present complaint under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) “hereinafter referred to as the Act”. The Complainant, took admission in B.Sc. (Non-Medical) with Bio-Chemistry Part-I in the OP-College for the session 2010-2011, by depositing total fees of Rs.26,132/- vide Receipt dated 3.7.2010. She attended the class of the aforesaid course only for one day i.e. 15.07.2010, and in the interest of best future opportunities, she got admission in Bachelor of Engineering at Swami Devi Dayal Global Institute of Engineering Golpura (Barwala), Haryana. She informed the OP about her quitting the seat vide application dated 17.7.2010, along with the request for refund of the entire fee of Rs.26,132/-, which the OP flatly refused. She served a notice dated 21.12.2010 upon the OP College, but the same also failed to fructify. Hence, this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OP amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2.             Notice of the complaint was sent to OP seeking her version of the case.

3.             OP in her written statement, while admitting the core facts of the case, pleaded that the Complainant secured admission in the OP -College in B.Sc. (Non-Medical) with Bio-Chemistry Part-I on 3.7.2010. It was denied that the Complainant has ever informed the OP about quitting her seat. No such application has ever been submitted by her, as alleged. All other material contentions of the complaint were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

4.             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.             We have heard the authorized representative of the complainant and learned counsel for OP, and have also perused the record.

6.             Admittedly, the Complainant took admission in B.Sc. (Non-Medical) with Bio-Chemistry Part-I in the OP-College for the session 2010-2011, by depositing total fees of Rs.26,132/- vide Receipt dated 3.7.2010(Annexure C-1). It is also clear that the complainant got admission in Bachelor of Engineering at Swami Devi Dayal Global Institute of Engineering Golpura (Barwala), Haryana.

7.             Learned counsel for OP contended that  there are 15 seats in the B.Sc. (Non-medical) with Bio-Chemistry and out of these 15 seats course only 9 could be filled and the remaining six seats are still lying vacant. To support this, OP has not produced any record in the form of attendance roll or admission chart of the candidates in the said course. Therefore, the plea of the OPs that out of 15 seats only 9 seats could be filled and the remaining six seats are still lying vacant cannot be believed. In the absence of the documentary evidence, the self-serving affidavit of Ms.Meena Prabhakar, Principal of OP-College is not sufficient to prove it. Therefore, it is presumed that the seat vacated by the complainant was filled up by the OP by giving admission to some other candidate.

8.             Learned counsel for OP has relied upon the UGC guidelines dated 23.04.2007 (Annexure R-5). The operative part of the said UGC guidelines are reads as under: -

3.  The Ministry of Human Resource Development and University Grants Commission have considered the issue and decided that the institutions and Universities, in the public interest, shall maintain a waiting list of students/candidates in the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course, the wait-listed candidate 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. 1000 (one thousand only) shall be refunded and returned by the institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme. 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.

4.       The Universities/Institutions are requested to abide by the instructions issued by the UGC. The UGC shall on its own or on receipt of specific complaints from those affected, take all such steps as may be necessary to enforce these directions.

5.       Institutions/Universities are also required to convey these instructions to the colleges affiliated to them.”

         After going through the said UGC guidelines, we are of the view that the Institute was unfair and unjust in retaining the admission fee of Rs.26,132/- even after the student withdrew from their Institute.

9.       As a result of the above findings, this complaint is allowed. OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.26,132/- paid by the complainant at the time of admission after deducting the following:

i)  Rs.1000/- as administration charges as per UGS guidelines.

ii) Proportionate fees for one day.

          The Complainant is also entitled to compensation of Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and Rs.2000/- as litigation charges. The aforesaid order be complied with by the OP, within a period of one month from the receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall pay the above said amount along with interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 17.06.2011 till the date of realization besides cost of litigation.

10.    Certified copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.