ORDER

(Passed on 30/07/2019)

PER SHRI.ATUL D.ALSI, PRESIDENT.

     The complainant has filed this complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 against Opposite Party Rajiv Gandhi College of Engineering,Research & Technology, Chandrapur, for non refund of his 5th and 6th Semister Fees and thereby claiming refund of fees alongwith compensation and cost of proceeding.

2.      The facts in short giving rise to this petition are that the complainant was a student of BE Mechanical in OP Engineering College from 15/7/2015 for four years course devided in 8 semisters and paid Rs.1,08,300/- towards fees for first two semisters on 12/9/2015 through educational loan advanced by SBI, Chandrapur and further paid Rs.1,16,580/- for the 3rd and 4th semister. Unfortunately, the complainant could not clear 3rd and 4th Semister and hence was disqualified for getting admission to 5th and 6th semister.

3.   The complainant then decided to leave engineering and to take admission for another course in another college. Hence the complainant requested the OP college for Transfer Certificate (TC). However, the OP firstly refused to issue TC but then shown its readyness only if the complainant deposits fees for 5th and 6th Semisters. As the complainant was not at all eligible for admission to 5th and 6th semisters, this demand of OP to deposit fees for those semisters was illegal. However, left with no option, the complainant deposited Rs.50,000/- with the OP on 5/8/2018 and then only the OP issued TC to the complainant and the complainant could secure his admission to another institution. The OP had no right to compell the complainant to deposit Rs.50,000/- and hence this recovery made by the OP is illegal. Hence the complainant requested for refund of Rs.50,000/- deposited and also issued legal notice to the OP in this regard on 9/10/2018, but the OP did not comply the notice. Hence, the complainant has filed this complaint.

4.      The complaint is admitted and notice was served on the OP. The OP appeared before the Forum and raised a preliminery objection that the primary and statutory function of the OP is to impart education and hence the complainant who is its student can not be termed as its Consumer, as such, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the same deserves to be dismissed.

5.     The OP admitted in its reply that the complainant had secured admission to four years course of Mechanical Engineering in their college for the year 2015-16 from management quota. As per the rules, the admission can be cancelled by a student only in first year and thereafter the admission can not be cancelled. If the admission has to be cancelled then the student has to deposit whole fees for remaining semisters. The college is running on no grant basis and hence all expenses and salaries are paid from the fees collected from students. It further submitted that the complainant himself had moved an application for permission to take provisional admission for the 5th sem as his result of revaluation of his 3rd and 4th semisters papers was not yet received. On his request only the complainant was provisionally admitted to 5th and 6th semister on 3/8/2018. The complainant on his own deposited Rs.50,000/- and further agreed to pay balance 1,66,000/- later on. Thereafter, the complainant applied for TC. Taking into consideration his loss of educational year, the OP issued him TC. In this entire conduct of the OP there is no deficiency in service on their part and hence the petition deserves to be dismissed with cost.

6.      Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant could not clear 3rd and 4th Semister and hence was disqualified from getting admission to 5th and 6th semister. Hence the complainant decided to leave engineering and to take admission to some other course in another institution. Hence the complainant requested the OP college for issuance of TC. The counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant was compelled by the OP College to submit an application seeking permission to take provisional admission to 5th semister and to deposit entire fees for the same, else, they would not issue TC to him. As the complainant had not cleared his 3rd and 4th semisters, he was not eligible for admission to 5th semister itself and hence the demand made by the OP was illegal. However, left with no alternative, the complainant had to move application dated 7/8/2018 accordingly. However, as it was against the rules, even the OP had to reject that application, and the OP accordingly rejected it on 13/8/2018 which is at Exh.7/NA. The counsel for complainant further argued that there is no proof of service of said letter of rejection to the complainant. So, the OP by adopting unfair trade practice, illegally compelled the complainant to take provisional admission to 5th semister and to deposit Rs.50,000/- for the same and then only it issued TC. After securing admission to another course in another institution, the complainant asked the OP for refund of amount illegally recovered from him, but the OP did not respond. Hence the petition may be allowed as prayed.

7.        Counsel for the OP argued that the Power of Attorney filed by the complainant which is executed in favour of his father is bad in law. The dispute pertains to imparting education and hence the complainant can not be termed as their consumer. The Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and it deserves to be dismissed with cost.

8.     He further averred that the complainant had himself moved an application stating therein that he wishes to apply for revaluation of his 3rd and 4th year papers and hence he may be allowed to secure provisional admission to 5th semister. He had deposited only Rs.50,000/- and had sought time to deposit the balance amount in future. As per the rule also, the student leaving the course midway has to deposit total fees for the entire course. However, considering his loss of educational year, the OP as a curtosy measure, issued him TC. So there is no negligence or deficiency in service on their part and the petition deserves to be dismissed.

9.    We have gone through the complaint, written version filed by OP, affidavit, documents and WNA filed by the parties. We have also heard the oral arguments advanced by parties.

                    Points                                                                        Finding

1. Whether the complainant is a Consumer ?                                     Yes

2.  Whether  there is deficiency in service on the part of

   Opposite Party ?                                             Yes

3.  What order ?                                                                  As per final order..

As to issue No.1 & 2

10.      The complainant has filed on record the receipts to show payment of fees and other charges.Non refund of fees to the student when he is not eligible for admission in that year is a grave negligency and the student is consumer within sec.2(1)(D)of C.P.Act 1986.As per judgment of H’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,New Delhi,in Andhra University v/s Janjanam Jagdish in C.P.J.2010(3)310holding that non-refund of fees and request of original certificates and demand of another semister fees amounts to deficiency of service and the complainant  is consumer.  The basic dispute is regarding refund of Rs.50,000/- which is allegedly recovered by the OP from the complainant for his provisional admission to 5th semister. Admittedly the complainant could not clear 3rd and 4th semister. He wanted to leave engineering and secure admission to another course in another institution and was in need of Transfer Certificate (TC). So he applied for the same on 3/8/2018 but the OP compelled the complainant to deposit Rs.50,000/- as partial payment of fees towards provisional admission to 5th semister. It is true that the complainant was never admitted as a regular student to 5th semister as he could not clear the 3rd and 4th semisters. As per rules, the application for revaluation of exam paper is required to be submitted through college. However, the OP has not filed any evidence to show that the complainant had applied for revaluation of his 3rd and 4th year exam papers. It is the rule of University that the student who fails to clear his 3rd and 4th semister could not be given admission to 5th semister. Even then, though the complainant was not at all eligible for admission to 5th sem, the OP compelled him to take provisional admission to 5th semister and to deposit partial fees of Rs.50,000/-. Therefore there is clearcut deficiency in service on the part of OP and the complainant is entitled to refund of fees of Rs.50,000/- recovered from him by the OP alongwith 9% interest thereon from the date of admission of this petition till realization alongwith adequate compensation and cost. Hence the issue is decided accordingly.

As to issue No.2

11.        In view of our above observations, we pass the following order..

Final order

1. The Complaint is partly allowed.

2. The OP shall refund Rs.50,000/- to the complainant alongwith

  interest @9% p.a. thereon from 24/10/2018 till realization.

3. The OP shall also pay to the complainant compensation for mental

   and physical harrassment to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and further

   cost of proceeding quantified at Rs.10,000/-.   

3. Copy of the order be furnished to both the parties free of cost.

(Smt.Kalpana Jangade (Kute)  (Smt.Kirti Vaidya (Gadgil)     (Shri.Atul D.Alsi)

               Member                                 Member                                    President