Complainant/petitioner filed the complaint with the allegation that she took admission through State Council of Educational Research and Training, Haryana (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SCERT’) with the respondent for the session 2008-09 and deposited fee of Rs.50,000/-; that she was asked to pay Rs.50,000/- instead of Rs.34,500/-; that she asked for refund of the excess amount of Rs.15,500/- but instead of refunding the amount, respondent demanded Rs.5,000/- which was deposited by her.  However, no receipt in this regard was issued to her; that the respondent again demanded Rs.5,000/- from the petitioner which was wrong and illegal.  After completion of the course, she filed the complaint before the District Forum.

        On being served, respondents entered appearance and contested the complaint.  Respondents took the plea that Roll No.8283757 was not of respondent’s college but was of the SCERT; that the respondents had rightly charged Rs.50,000/- from the petitioner.  It was further submitted that the SCERT had not prescribed the condition that only Rs.34,500/- could be charged; that the respondents did not charge any excess amount from the petitioner.

        District Forum allowed the complaint and granted the relief asked for.  Being aggrieved, respondents filed the appeal before the State Commission, which has been allowed by observing thus :

“It is not denied that complainant took admission through State Council of Educational Research & Training, Haryana with OP-appellant for the Session 2009-2009 and deposited the fee of Rs.50,000/-.  Though, as per complainant the fee prescribed was Rs.34,500/-, however, she was charged Rs.50,000/- and on her seeking refund of excess amount she was not permitted to enter the college, however, the entire complaint is vague.  She did not utter a word as to from which date onwards complainant was not allowed to attend the college.  There is not a word as to on which date she asked for refund of the fee.  She filed the complaint after the end of session i.e. on 24.4.2009 seeking the refund of entire fee which OPs rightly denied.  It is not a case where the complainant had sought the refund of fee during ongoing of session.  There is neither any request nor any document has been placed on the file that complainant ever requested for refund of the fee and on which date.  In the absence, only the date of filing of complaint is being considered as the date of seeking refund, which was after the session was over and this cannot be allowed.  Learned District Forum has erred in allowing the complaint.  The order of the District Forum cannot be sustained.”

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Petitioner did not produce any documents showing that she had asked for refund of the fee from the respondent.  She has not been able to show that the respondent had charged the amount in excess of what had been provided by the SCERT.  Otherwise also, the amount involved is very meager.

No interference is called for.  Dismissed.