MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 1513/2009

 The revision was dismissed for non prosecution by order dated 20.11.2009. The Petitioner has filed an application for review of the said order in which it is stated that he had sent letter to this Commission regarding his inability to conduct the case personally. In the review application it is also stated that the matter be examined on merits on the basis of record filed in the revision petition. In view of this, the order dated 20.11.2009 is set aside and the revision is restored to its original number.

REVISION PETITION No.3374/2009

On merits, I have gone through the matter. The revision is against the concurrent findings of two fora below. The complaint filed by the present Petitioner was dismissed by the District Forum. The appeal filed against the order of the District Forum was dismissed by the State Commission. The Petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.3020/- towards admission fee, tuition fee etc. on 12.6.2006 with the Respondent. However, he took admission in Bio-Tech Course in another Institution and informed the said fact to the Opposite Party. According to the Petitioner he had informed the said fact on 19.6.2006 but according to Opposite Party, the said fact was informed on 28.6.2006. The stand taken by the Opposite Party was that in accordance with Circular No. C/1066/Circular dated 21.7.1993 the Inspector of Colleges, University of Calcutta informed that colleges were instructed to put an indication on the back of the marksheet of each and every student at the time of admission and in case a student wants to get himself admitted into any other college he shall have to get his admission into the previous college cancelled by the relevant authority of the earlier college and in no case a student will be considered for admission into a second college until his first admission is cancelled by the relevant authority of the first college. The circular was issued to achieve wholesome purpose behind the admissions where students take admission in an institution and then apply in another Institution and get admission into the college without getting admission in the previous college cancelled by the relevant authority of the earlier college. In view of the said circular, the Respondent had asked the Complainant to produce original marksheet of his son for consideration on the question of refund of the amount for cancellation of admission, but the Complainant did not comply with the same. Since the Complainant himself is at fault in not complying with the same, he cannot complain of any deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party. The complaint was, therefore, rightly dismissed not only by the District Forum but the appeal was also very rightly dismissed by the State Commission as there was no deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party.For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this revision and the revision is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.