Order-16.
Date-09/07/2015.
Complainant Richa Dey by filing this complaint submitted that she sat for E-counselling in the year 2012 and her rent was Rs. 73,500/-, so she did not get any college in 1st Counselling and she went to college – RCC Institute of Information Technology for admission in Management quota for I.T. Stream and accordingly as per their demand, she deposited Rs. 2,36,600/- at the time of admission on 04.07.2012.
But before starting of Session 2012-2013, she further got an opportunity and selected in 2nd counseling and then again in 3rd counselling, she further selected for I.T. Stream in College – Calcutta Institute of Engineering and Management on 25.07.2012 and on the same date at the time of fulfilling formalities she requested them to pay back the money paid by the complainant.But the officers of Institute refused to pay back the same and harassed her in different manner for one year and 6 months.
Complainant took the help of lawyer to get back the money and against that letter op sent a letter informed that as per Rules and Regulations, complainant is entitled to get Rs. 14,500/- and a cheque was sent to the complainant, but complainant did not accept the said cheque and returned it back as it was not acceptable as per NCTE guideline.Kreta Suraksha informed her about NCTE guidelines etc. and as per guidance of Kreta Suraksha, she went to Higher Education Department and sent all details and they received and asked to RCC Institute of Information & Technology to respond, but RCC did not respond and then considering that negative attitude and deficiency and negligent manner of service, this complaint is filed with a prayer of refund of Rs. 2,36,600/- with interest and relief.
On the other hand op by filing written statement submitted that no doubt complainant took admission in Management Quota and deposited Rs. 2,36,600/- which was received by the said Institute under certain Heads i.e. Admission Fees, Tuition Fees, Library Fees, Students Welfare and Sports & Games Fees, University Fees and Caution Money.
But complainant subsequently withdrew from the course and left the college voluntarily and on her own will and demanded refund of the aforesaid amount paid to the institute.But the present college is guided by All India Council for Technical Education (A.I.C.T.E) and as per public notice of AICTE that any institution imparting technical education is not liable to refund fees collected by it from a student if such student leaves the course and the concerned seat left by her/him is not filled up by another candidate within the last date of admission to such course in the institution.
In fact the empty seat left vacant by the complainant in the concerned stream at the college could not be filled up by any other student since no other student applied for admission in respect of the vacant seat in the concerned course in respect of academic year.Accordingly, the college had no opportunity to recover the admission fees from any other candidate in order to refund the same to the complainant.
Further it is submitted that maximum strength of candidates in B. Tech (Information Technology) stream at the college was to the extent of Rs. 10,000/- and another 5 seats are allowed in the said stream every academic year under the Tuition Fee Waiver Quota as per AICTE norms and it is revealed from a list of candidates undergoing the course of B. Tech it would be found that 94 seats were filled up.But one is vacant for complainant’s withdrawal from the college and complainant did it of her own will.But complainant in respect of refund amount, did not accept it and declined to accept the same and returned the said cheque.
In fact college has no motive of earning profit and on the contrary the college is bound by an order of the Higher Education Department, Government of West Bengal whereby college is under an obligation to award Full-freeship i.e. Full-tuition fee waiver and Hlaf-freeship i.e. Half-tution fee waiver to 10 percent of the candidates studying in various courses in the college.The amount of admission fee collected from the students admitted under the management quota is utilized for providing subsidy to the candidates availing Full-freeship and Half-freeship and this process is adopted in terms of the aforesaid order of the Higher Education Department, Government of West Bengal.
In fact college has utilized its earnings from admission under the Management Quota for the academic year 2012-13 for providing Full-freeship and Hlaf-freeship to the students of the college admitted in the concerned academic year.So, there was no negligence and deficiency on the part of the op for which the present complaint should be dismissed.
Decision with reasons
On proper study of the complaint and written version and also relying upon the documents as filed by the both parties and also on overall evaluation of the same and including the argument as advanced by the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties, we have gathered that admitted position is that complainant was admitted at her own will in the Management Quota of the RCC Institute of Information Technology because initially she did not get any chance as her rank was 73500.Thereafter on 3rd Counselling she was selected for I.T. Stream in college – Calcutta Institute of Engineering and Management on 25.07.2012.Whereas in Management Quota at her own will she admitted on 04.07.2012.
She herself no doubt did not attend any class as she was admitted to Calcutta Institute of Engineering and Management before the starting of Session 2012-13.When that is the fact then the complainant at her own will withdrew herself from the said college and left the college.But complainant has failed to prove any sort of deficiency or negligence on the part of the op in this regard.No doubt the op is a AICTE recognized State Government approved under West Bengal Government affiliated college and as per Rules, they are entitled to take admission of students for Management Quota and from that Management Quota as per Government order of Higher Secondary Education, the said amount is distributed to certain students.
Truth is that in respect of Management Quota if any student is admitted, in that case, she is not entitled to get back any amount.But fact remains that complainant was admitted against Management Quota by paying Rs. 2,36,600/- and in the said year admission fee was Rs. 4,000/-, tuition fees was Rs. 2,16,000/-, library fees was Rs. 1,000/-, student welfare and sports & games fees was Rs. 1,000/- University fees was Rs. 4,600/- and caution money was Rs. 10,000/-, i.e. total Rs. 2,36,600/- and that was the rate of the admission of any student.
Anyhow Ld. Lawyer of the op has tried to convince that as per AICTE Rules and Regulations, fees and other amount if it is paid by any student and he/she withdraws him/her candidature before the starting of the course and against that candidature if no new student is admitted and seat is found vacant, in that case, the said student who withdrew from the course, is not entitled to get back the refund money and by adopting such authorization and also the Rules and Regulations, complainant’s case was considered by the college authority and she was refunded Rs. 14,600/- and cheque was sent to the complainant but complainant did not accept the said cheque.
But after considering the advertisement bearing No. AICTE/Legal/04(01)/2007 we have gathered that the whole direction and regulation is wrongly interpreted by the op.But as per the said notification, it is clear that “In the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course, the wait listed candidates should be given admissions against the vacant seat.The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs. 1,000/- shall be refunded and returned by the Institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme.It would not be permissible for Institutions and Universities to retain the school/institution Leaving Certificates in original, Should a student leave after joining the course, the Institution must return the fee collected with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where it is applicable.Any violation of instructions issued by the AICTE, shall call for punitive action including withdrawal of approval and recognition of erring institutions and Universities.AICTE shall take steps as may be necessary to enforce these directions”.
On plain reading of the above instruction and regulation of the AICTE, we find that there are two part, and it is specifically mentioned in the first part that a student or candidate withdrew him/her before starting of the course.Another is a student left after joining of the course.But in the present case the student withdrew herself before starting of the course, before starting of the session also.Then as part of instruction as already mentioned, we are convinced that there was no scope on the part of the op to deduct any amount except Rs. 1,000/- out of the total deposited amount because AICTE already confirmed that in the event of a student withdrawing before starting of the course the wait listed candidates should be given admissions against the vacant seat.The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs. 1,000/- shall be refunded and returned by the Institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme.When that is the fact, then it is clear that this candidate the complainant does not come under the purview of the second part.But her status is in respect of this first part.Then invariably op is bound to refund the entire amount deducting of Rs. 1,000/- in view of the AICTE.
There is no such guideline or instruction or Rules and Regulations of AICTE that until and unless the vacant seat is filled by a fresh student against the student who has left the said course shall not get refund of the said amount.Anyhow the interpretation as made by the op is completely baseless and without any foundation.
Fact remains that this complainant not only deposited that amount on proper receipt.But some other amount was also received by the college for Management Quota in respect of which no receipt is issued by college and that amount is in the pocket of the college authority that is not expressed and that is the fact, then invariably ops did not render good services, did not comply the direction of the AICTE and only managed to grab the entire amount by sending a meagre amount as per their own wish.Truth is that this college authority acted illegally, adopted an unfair path by making a misleading meaning of the regulation which has been submitted by the op.
So, considering that fact, we are convinced that op college authority did not render proper service as per rules of AICTE, they did not refund the same after deducting Rs. 1,000/- and fact remains that girl has been harassed by the op an educational institution.We have failed to understand how an educational institution has taken a path of deceiving the student like the traders and no doubt this conduct of the op is no doubt in a deceitful manner of educational trade, though they are claiming that they are an autonomous society of department of Higher Education, Government of West Bengal.If this is an act of an autonomous society of Government of West Bengal, then invariably the private colleges have taken worst deceitful path to deceive the student in such a manner which is known to all.
Most interesting factor is that op institute has violated the instruction of the AICTE and now a flag institution is in the field of educational trade, claiming them Autonomous Society of Department of Higher Education, Government of West Bengal.But anyhow we have gathered that ops no doubt deceived the complainant in so many manners, harassed the complainant in so many ways only for the purpose of grabbing their money as deposited by the complainant at the time of admission.
But truth is that she left the said college being selected in E-counselling in another college and no doubt prior to starting of the said session of the year 2012, she was admitted to another college.When that is the fact, then it is proved that complainant has not been properly entertained by the ops and ops also did not render proper service by not refunding the same. No doubt ops are negligent in this regard and invariably as per that guideline and as per AICTE norms, the institute is liable to refund the entire amount received from the complainant after deducting only Rs. 1,000/-.
Fact remains that defence has interpreted a language of the institution, instruction of the AICTE, in such a manner only to deceive the admitted student, so that op may not anyway refund the same to the student who have left the college after admission. But we are unable to understand for what reason such sort of interpretation is made by the op and why the Government has not taken any step against such institution who are mis-interpreting the AICTE guidelines only to deprive the student from getting back their entitled amount as refund.
In view of the above findings we are convinced that the complainant is entitled to get back the entire amount of Rs. 2,36,600/- after deduction of Rs. 1,000/- and also a cost of Rs. 3,000/- immediately within one month from the date of this order.But no separate compensation is admitted against the ground that the complainant is awarded for the Management Quota.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs. 3,000/- against the op.
Ops are hereby directed to refund a sum of Rs. 2,36,600/- after deducting of Rs. 1,000/- as service charge, as per AICTE norms within one month from the date of this order positively, failing which complainant shall have to get penal interest over the said amount at the rate 9 percent p.a. till full satisfaction of the same by the op.
Ops are hereby directed to comply the order very strictly, failing which penal action shall be started u/s 27/25 of C.P. Act 1986 for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed upon them.
