BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.            

                                                Consumer Complaint no. 222 of 2015                                                                           

                                                 Date of Institution         :    14.12.2015                                                                         

                                                  Date of Decision   :   30.11.2016

Nirmala Devi, aged about 35 years wife of Mahavir daughter of Sh. Mangala Ram, R/o village Balasar, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa.

                      ……Complainant.

                                      Versus.

1. Sir Chhotu Ram Jat Senior Sec. School, Near Police Station, Ellenabad through its Principal.

2. Rashoba College of Education village Moriwala, District Sirsa through its Principal.

3. District Welfare Officer, Sirsa.

                                                                    ...…Opposite parties.

                    Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SHRI S.B.LOHIA……………………….PRESIDENT

          SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL……MEMBER.   

Present:       Sh.S.S. Chauhan,  Advocate for the complainant.

Sh. Bhupinder Khattar, Advocate for opposite party No.1.

Sh. Deepak Goyal, Advocate for opposite party No.2.

Sh. Ajay Kumar, Govt. Pleader for opposite party no.3.

ORDER

                   In brief, the case of the complainant is that she got admission in Rashoa College of Education i.e. opposite party no.2 in B.Ed course on the inspiration of opposite party no.1 and op no.1 had taken all the responsibility of course completion in the institution of op no.2. The complainant deposited fee of Rs.19,000/- at the admission time on 6.10.2013 and on 11.10.2013 and after that she deposited Rs.10,000/- on 24.12.2013, Rs.10,000/- on 28.1.2014, Rs.400/- on 28.1.2014 and last payment of Rs.12,000/- on 20.5.2015 and a total sum of Rs.51,400/- was deposited by complainant. The complainant belongs to schedule caste community and as per the Govt. scholarship scheme, she was eligible for taking benefit of the scheme of Rs.49,300/- for the Sessions 2013-2014. She submitted her scholarship form with all necessary/ required documents including self income certificate and adhar card in the office of op no.2 through op no.1 on 30.10.2013 and after that upon asking by op no.3, she also submitted her husband’s income certificate on 8.11.2013 in the office of op no.1 and op no.2 also. It is further averred that after completion of B.Ed course, the scholarship amount was not deposited in her account. Then she contacted with all the ops and all the ops one by one misguided and harassed her and ultimately her father moved an application on 13.11.2014 before op no.3 for stating the reason for not giving scholarship assistance to complainant. But in response, op no.3 replied on 25.11.2014 that scholarship form was sent by op no.2 in their office without copy of adhar card and income certificate of husband of complainant. In fact the same was submitted with the scholarship form on 30.10.2013 in the office of op no.1 and after that in the office of op no.2. But thereafter as per the information given by op no.3 under RTI Act on 4.6.2015, op no.1 and op no.2 not submitted scholarship form of complainant after completely filling with all necessary columns and not sent income certificate in the name of complainant’s husband which was submitted on 8.11.2013. The opposite parties also not sent her scholarship form to Directorate Schedule Castes and Backward Class, Welfare Department Chandigarh, Haryana till 3.12.2014. The RTI documents supplied by ops show that op no.3 vide dispatched/diary no.3496 dated 31.10.2013 unique no.OB9Q6B accepted the scholarship form with all relevant documents from complainant. The complainant also sent legal notice on 15.6.2015 to the ops and in their reply all the ops denied the claim of complainant. Due to above said undesired act and behavior of ops, complainant without any fault on her part deprived from her scholarship amount of Rs.49,300/- from the Sessions of 2013-2014 and till today she is suffering mental agony and harassment and also financial loss. The complainant also moved applications on 4.9.2015 to Directorate Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Haryana, Chandigarh and Directorate Schedule Castes and Backward Classes, Haryana, Chandigarh for taking the financial assistance from all the ops. The ops have caused gross deficiency in service towards complainant and she is also entitled to compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses from them. Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, opposite party no.1 appeared and filed written statement denying the contents of the complaint in toto. It has been submitted that answering op never inspired the complainant for taking admission with op no.2. No writing was made between the complainant and op no.1 regarding any such responsibility. Even answering op does not know the complainant. Neither the complainant visited the answering op nor any document has been supplied by her to answering op.

3.                Opposite party no.2 replied that complainant taken admission in the institution of op no.2 for the sessions 2013-14. As confirmed from records, op no.2 received a sum of Rs.48,290/- on account of fees etc. from complainant i.e. Rs.44,000/- towards tuition fee and Rs.4290/- towards university charges. It is relevant to state here that as per request/demand of student, a certificate vide reference no.170/3490 dated 31.10.2013 in this regard was also issued to her. Thus, it is wrong to allege that complainant paid a sum of Rs.51,400/- to op no.2. It is specifically denied that complainant ever deposited/ submitted her scholarship form and other necessary documents with the office of op no.2 through op no.1. However, it is confirmed from record that scholarship forms and documents attached with that form which were submitted by complainant in the office of op no.2 were sent to the office of op no.3 as soon as received from complainant. Even as per assertions of complaint, it is admitted that the scholarship form was received in the office of op no.3 on 31.10.2013. After receiving objection from the office of op no.3 for requirement of some documents, it was very well conveyed to the complainant to submit those documents with the office of op no.3 as well as with answering op, but even after receiving such information from op no.2, complainant did not pay any heed to the necessary requirements for submitting those documents. The op no.2 is an educational institution and consumer complaint is not maintainable.

4.                Opposite party no.3 filed separate written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, mis-joinder and suppression of material facts and that she has not come with clean hands because the fact remains that the application for post matric scholarship to schedule caste and other backward class for the year 2013-2014 alongwith the college Memo/ letter bearing No.170/1490 dated 31.10.2013 alongwith the documents were supplied to the replying op. However, as the complainant failed to supply the income certificate of the Karta/Head of the family i.e. income certificate of Mahavir husband of complainant as well as the adhar card of complainant and as these documents specifically the income certificate of Mahavir is most necessary/ important document and the basic ingredient for availing the benefits under the said Scheme, hence, the application of the complainant furnished by her through op no.2 was not entertained by op no.3 and same was sent back to op no.2. The message to this effect was also sent at the cell number of complainant, but they both failed to provide the same through proper channel as per stipulated and condition precedent in the Scheme Under Class XI Sub clause (ii), wherein it has been specifically laid down that “Application complete in all respects shall be submitted to the Head of the Institution, being attended or last attended or last attended by the candidates and shall be addressed to an officer specified for this purpose to the Government of State/union territory to which the student belongs, in accordance with the instructions issued by them from time to time” and as such there is no question of any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of op no.3 and the benefits of scholarship to the eligible persons/ candidates are provided under the said scheme free of cost. Thereafter, the complainant of her own furnished the documents regarding the income certificate of her husband Mahavir which was furnished by Mangala Ram father of the complainant only on 13.11.2014 and thereafter as per the demand of complainant and for the justification of the complainant, the legal objection for non sanction of the scholarship in her favour has been explained to complainant vide letter No.2300 dated 25.11.2014. It is also relevant to mention here that as the complainant has furnished the documents only on 13.11.2014 and it has also been explained to her that as the time/ powers of sanctioning and providing the facility of scholarship under the said scheme has gone lapsed from the powers/ range of op no.3 and inspite of this, op no.3 acting as bonafide, the case of the complainant was forwarded to the Head Office namely “The Director, Department of Schedule Caste and Backward Class Welfare, Chandigarh” vide letter bearing Endst. No.2436 dated 3.12.2014 and the abovesaid department has refused/ declined the sanction of scholarship under the said scheme in favour of complainant vide letter No.4164 dated 4.3.2015. As such, complaint of complainant against answering op is not sustainable because the complainant cannot force the Govt. Department to provide the benefits of State Govt’s scheme by committing the wrongs of her own. The complainant should seek the appropriate remedy. Moreover, it is the duty/responsibility of the concerned College/ Universities to collect the complete documents from the candidate/ applicant who applied for the scholarship under the said scheme. With these averments, dismissal of complaint qua op no.3 has been prayed for.

5.                In evidence, complainant has tendered documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C36. On the other hand, op no.2 tendered affidavit of Ms. Preeti Rani, Officiating Principal Ex.R1, copy of certificate dated 31.10.2013 Ex.R2 and copy of reply to legal notice Ex.R3. OP no.1 tendered affidavit of Sh. Surender Kumar, Principal Ex.RW4. OP no.3 tendered affidavit of Smt. Sumitra Mehta, Distt. Welware Officer, Sirsa Ex.RW3 and documents Ex.RW3/1 to Ex.RW3/8.

6.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.

7.                 First of all, in so far as objection of opposite party no.2 that op no.2 is an educational institution and consumer complaint is not maintainable is concerned, learned counsel for complainant has relied upon judgment of the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in case titled as Ranchi University and Anr. Vs. Nuzmat Sultana and Ors. 2008 (4) CPJ 148 wherein it has been held that “Institution charges frees for imparting education and University for conducting examination, they are not rendering services free of cost. Services of University hired for consideration, complainant is a consumer.” No contrary law has been cited on behalf of opposite party no.2 and therefore, contention of opposite party no.2 is hereby repelled. 

8.                According to complainant, she belongs to schedule caste community and as per Govt. scholarship scheme, she was eligible for taking benefit of this scholarship scheme of Rs.49,300/- for the Sessions 2013-2014. Accordingly, she submitted her scholarship form with all necessary documents with her college i.e. opposite party no.2 on 30.10.2013 and after that upon asking of opposite party no.3, she also submitted income certificate of her husband on 8.11.2013 to opposite party no.2. But due to act and conduct of the opposite parties, she has been deprived from her scholarship amount of Rs.49,300/-. On the other hand, the opposite party no.3 claims that they received application of the complainant alongwith College Memo/letter bearing No.170/1490 dated 31.10.2013 alongwith documents but they sent back the application of the complainant to the opposite party no.2 for want of income certificate of husband of complainant and adhar card of the complainant. There is nothing on file to prove that opposite party no.2 ever conveyed the complainant about submission of these documents well in time. From the letter of District Welfare Officer dated 4.10.2013 Ex.C21 written to Principal/ Director- Principal All Institutes, Sirsa it is evident that they were directed to get applications from the eligible students for getting scholarship alongwith necessary documents and to send the same up to 31.10.2013. Further more, from the letter of the Director, Welfare of Scheduled Caste and Backward Classes Department, Haryana, Chandigarh written to the District Welfare Officer, Sirsa bearing No.11221-41 dated 13.5.2010 Ex.RW3/7, it was directed to write to all the heads of institutions that they must submit documents after checking all the conditions relating to income, resident certificate, caste certificate and free structure etc. Further, there is another letter dated 17.7.2013 on file as Ex.C23 vide which the District Welfare Officer, Sirsa directed the Principal, All Education Institutions, District Sirsa to verify the documents regarding income and adhar card etc. attached with the form and therefore, it was the duty of the opposite party no.2 to send the application of the complainant alongwith income certificate of husband of complainant and adhar card to the opposite party no.3 well in time but opposite party no.2 has failed to do so. From the document Ex.C12-A placed on file by the complainant and then from the same document placed on file by opposite party no.3 as Ex.RW3/6, it is evident that other seven students of the same College i.e. Rashoba College of Education, Sirsa in the Sessions 2013-2014 have obtained scholarship of Rs.44,000/- each and it has been proved on record that due to negligent act of opposite party no.2, the complainant has been deprived from getting the scholarship from the Government as per its scheme and therefore, opposite party no.2 is liable to compensate the complainant. However, there is no deficiency of service of any kind on the part of opposite parties No.1 & 3.

9.                Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, we allow the present complaint qua opposite party no.2 and direct the opposite party no.2 to pay compensation of Rs.44,000/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order as she has been deprived from getting the said amount as scholarship from the Government due to negligent act of opposite party no.2. In case of failure of op no.2 to comply the order, the complainant will entitled to interest @9% per annum from the date of order from op no.2 till actual payment. However, complaint qua opposite parties No.1 & 3 stands dismissed. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.                                 President,

Dated:30.11.2016                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                       Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                                      Member.