RESERVED    

     STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                   UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                                       APPEAL NO. 1185 OF 2015

              (Against judgment and order dated 30-05-2015 in Complaint

            Case No. 252/2013 of the District Consumer Forum, Gazipur )

Dr. Sujata Paikaray

W/o Dr. Anukul Chandra Kar

R/o 7, FF, Old Medical Enclave

BHU, Varanasi.

                                                                                         ...Appellant

                                                           Vs.

1. S. G. M. Ayurvedic Medical College & Hospital

Saheri, Nandganj

Gazipur-233001

Through its General Secretary Mr. Anam Ahmed

2. Chatrapati Sahu Ji Maharaj University

Kanpur

Through Registrar

3. Central Council of Indian Medicine

61-65, Institutional Area, Janakpuri

New Delhi-110058

Through its Secretary

                                                                                    ...Respondents

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

For the Appellant                     :    Sri Sushil Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent No.1         :    Sri Satya Prakash Pandey, Advocate.

For the Respondents No.2&3  :    None appeared             

Dated :  14-06-2017

                                                  JUDGMENT

        PER MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 30-05-2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Gazipur in Complaint Case No. 252 of 2013 Dr. Sujata Paikaray V/s S. G. M. Ayurvedic Medical College and others whereby the District Consumer Forum has dismissed complaint filed by complainant Dr. Sujata Paikaray on the ground that the relief prayed by complainant in present complaint has already been granted by Honourable

:2:

High Court, Allahabad vide order passed in writ petition.

Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Forum, the complainant Dr. Sujata Paikaray of above complaint  has filed this appeal before State Commission.

Learned Counsel Mr. Sushil Kumar Sharma appeared for the appellant.

Learned Counsel Mr. Satya Prakash Pandey appeared for respondent no.1.

None appeared for respondents no. 2 and 3 inspite of sufficient service of notice.

I have heard learned Counsel for the appellant as well as learned Counsel for the respondent no.1 and perused impugned judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Forum.

Appellant/complainant has filed complaint against opposite parties  S.G.M. Ayurvedic Medical College and others seeking refund of Rs.7,05,000/- paid by her to opposite party No.1 for admission in (M.S.) Rognidan course run by opposite parties now respondents. It has been alleged in complaint that when she contacted opposite party no.1 for giving admission, she was informed that recognition of opposite party no.1 S. G. M. Ayurvedic Medical College has been suspended by opposite party no.3 Central Council of Indian Medicine for 2011-12 session. However, steps are being taken by the institution for getting renewal of recognition.

In complaint it has been further alleged by complainant/appellant that opposite party no.1 could not get renewal of recognition. As such, classes for (M.S.) Rognidan were not run by opposite party no.1 for academic session of 2011-2012.

Perusal of impugned judgment and order passed by the District Consumer Forum shows that the Hon’ble High Court, Allahabad has already passed order in writ petition filed before it whereby direction has been issued to the opposite party no.1 to refund fees deposited by students for admission in the above course. Indisputably Writ Petition No. 60738 of 2011 was filed by respondent/opposite party no.1 S.G.M. Ayurvedic Medical College before

:3:

Hon’ble High Court, Allahabad wherein Hon’ble High Court has passed order directing management of the opposite party no.1 S.G.M. Ayurvedic Medical College to refund the fees deposited by students for getting admission in academic year 2011-12 for the above course with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Opposite party/respondent no.1 is bound to comply the order of Hon’ble High Court passed in said writ petition and to refund fees deposited by each student with interest as ordered by the Hon’ble High Court.

In view of order passed by Hon’ble High Court in writ petition no further order can be passed by the District Consumer Forum. As such the District Consumer Forum has rightly dismissed complaint filed by appellant/complainant.

In view of above I find no sufficient justification for interference in the impugned order passed by the District Consumer Forum.

Appeal is dismissed.

Parties shall bear their own costs.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties within 15 days positively as per rules.

( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                                    PRESIDENT

           Pnt.