West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/119/2014

HALTU- KASBA- GARFA Kreta Suraksha -O-Kalyan Samity Registered No. S/91074 - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI SAMIR NATH BE(ECE),MBA ,MLF, Chief Executive Officer -cum-Director of National Institute of Mana - Opp.Party(s)

21 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144

 

      C.C. CASE NO. _119_ OF ___2014_

 

DATE OF FILING : 20.3.2014                       DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:  21.06.2016

 

Present                         :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :    Mrs. Sharmi Basu & Subrata Sarker

                                                                             

COMPLAINANT              :    Haltu-Kasba-Garfa Kreta Suraksha-O-Kalyan Samity, at 31, Purbachal Main Road, P.O Haltu, P.S. Garfa, Kolkata – 78 

For and on behalf the De-facto Complainant i) Kumari Lakshmi Paul & Sreemati Rita Paul both daughters of Sri Chandranath paul of 34/1, Ajanta Road, New Santoshpur, P.O Santoshpur, P.S. Survey Park, Kolkata – 75.

 

-VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                            :  Sri Samir Nath, Chief Executive Officer-cum-Director of National Institute of Management and Technical Training, popularly known as its Trade mark™ named as “NIMTT” an University study-cum exam centre at L1/9, Vidyasagar, Military Road, 1^st and 2^nd floor, Baghajatin Opp. Baghajatin State General Hospital, P.O Naktala, Kolkata - 47

_______________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

Sri Udayan Mukhopadhyay, President

            The short case of the complainant is that  Km. Lakshmi Paul and Smt. Rita Paul ,both are sisters of each other and Science Graduates and working as SSC passed School Teacher in two different Schools in South 24-Parganas . It has further stated that in order to obtain higher academic qualification to get Master Decree in Science (Zoology) which might help them in future for their career progression as School Teacher through Distance Education Course of some University having its Authorised Study-cum- Examination Centre preferably in South Kolkata. It has further stated that from the advertisement in the Newspaper as well as information brochure and prospectus knowing the Institutional identity of the O.P the “NIMTT” as one of the authorized study-cum-examination centre having code  no. 1695 of the Periyar Institute of Distance Education (PRIDE) UNDER Periyar University, Salem in the State of Tamilnadu, both the de-facto complainants chose to get themselves admitted /enrolled to the said NIMTT from 6^th September, 2011 in two years course of Msc. Zoology by paying their respective course fees  . It has claimed that their enrolment numbers are C11P2016955002 for Lakshmi Paul and C11P2016950001 for Rita Paul ,which were issued on 6.9.2011 by NIMTT (Annexure 1 and 1A). It has further stated that NIMTT has also issued registration card in their own format to them which are annexed as annexure 2 and 2a. It has further stated that in order to provide them study the O.P has collected registration fees, and application fees ,in all Rs.33575/-  each. It may be mentioned here that O.P has collected two years fees which has been received by NIMTT at a time (annexure 3 series). It is the further allegation of the complainants that the venue , date of first year examination of the aforesaid course was 23.12.2011 at their head office at Baghajatin, Kolkata – 47 which was displayed in the notice board. The O.P also informed it over phone and asked them to collect admit card at least one week before. It has further stated that the O.P also informed to collect admit card which is ready and the same also can be available just before entering the examination hall and complainants believed the same. Thereafter on 23.12.2011 when the complainants attended NIMTT Head Office at Baghajatin,Kolkata – 47, with all preparations to sit for the 1^st year Msc.(zoology) Examination under Periyar Institute of Distance Education (PRIDE) under Periyar University, Salem came to know that the said first year examination of their course cannot be conducted on that date because the requisite question papers have not been received from the periyar Institute of distance Education (PRIDE) UNEER Periyar University, Salem. Accordingly they were told to contact NIMTTs after few days . Thereafter complainants contacted personally the NIMTT’s head office in order to know the fate of their first year examination of the said course and at that time they came to learn that they have some trouble with that university ,for which, complainants demanded  refund of their course fees i.e. Rs.33,575/- each but the same was not turned down by NIMTT official on the plea that fees once paid was not refundable under any circumstances which has been mentioned in the NIMTT’s money receipt. In this circumstances they have contacted top to bottom of NIMTT’s official but ultimately they did not get any result ,which is  nothing but a deficiency in service on the part of the O.P NIMTT. Hence, this complaint case with a prayer to refund the total fees paid by them along with interest @10% p.a from 3.11.2012 till its realization, compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- each and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

            The O.P-1 contested the case  by filing written version and denied all the allegations leveled against them. It is the positive case of the O.P tht this case is not maintainable in law and that students are not consumers and University/Institutions do not come under the Consumer Protection Act and this case is bad for defect of parties i.e. Periyar University, Salem.  It is the positive case of the O.P that complainants were scheduled to appear for first year Msc.  Zoology Examination on 23.12.2011 but inspite of handing over the hall ticket for sitting and giving the said examination at the venue of the examination centre complainants did not appear for the examination. Therefore, on 3.11.2012 they by letter demanded refund of the fees stating that they could not sit for the examination as the examination was not held in the centre. It is the further case of the O.P that at the time of admission of the distance course it was clearly told that NIMTT is a study centre and examination is conducted by the University at Examination centre of its own choice. It is the further case of the O.P that refund of fees shall be guided as per the provision laid down in refund proceedings of the NIMTT website(annexure 7). Accordingly it has claimed that complainant has miserably failed to make out any case against the O.P and hence the complaint petition should be dismissed.

            Points for decision in this case is whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps or not.

                                                                        Decision with reasons

            Admittedly O.P NIMTT is a Study Centre which was told to the complainant and examination was conducted by the University at examination centre of its own choice as per admitted case of the O.P. So, if the O.P is a study centre , can a Study Centre claims themselves an University?  It is well known to us that Board or University conducting examination is not a service provider. Herein Study Centre is not  fall within the purview of Board or University.  Their activity is like a broker , collecting fees and arrangement of degree from a recognized University ,herein Periyar University, Salem in the State of Tamilnadu.

            But from the deposit slips we find from annexure 2 that NIMT  has issued registration card. From annexure 3a of the O.P NIMTT it appears that O.P collected registration fee and application fee as well as examination fee.    So, money was accepted by the Study Centre who is not a Board or University. So, the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as Hon’ble State Commission will not attract in this case, of course  if the examination fees and registration fees and/or application fees was accepted by Periyar University, Salem, then definitely complainants/consumer have no case since University is not a service provider and in that event complainants/students were not consumers.

            But here in the instant case the circumstances is totally different and we have to consider the same very minutely and come to a proper conclusion in order to stop this type of unfair trade practice by the Study Centre like NIMTT,the O.P, otherwise the fate of the innocent student at large will be destroyed in the early morning of their life. So, It is the duty of the Government also, to stop this type of study centre which are coming out in order to squeeze money from the innocent students ,with an assurance of happy and bright future. The O.P NIMTT is a glaring example of that type of study centre.

            The Ld. Advocate of the O.P has drawn our attention to annexure 4 ,wherein we find that there is nothing adverse against the complainant because complainant has cleverly informed the CEO NIMTT that they took admission in Periyar University for doing Msc. Zoology but examination was not held in the centre and they could not sit for the examination but already paid full payment of the course fees of two years and wanted to refund the course fees and examination fees as soon as possible.   It may be mentioned here that if we consider this letter then one thing is clear that examination was not held in the center, that is why, complainants could not sit in the examination. It is not the fault of the complainants and it is the fault of the conducting persons namely the O.P who were conducting the examination with an assurance that they were admitted under the Periyar University, Salem in the course of Msc. Zoology. Although they have given assurance and collected money from them ,but  there is no document that the said money was transmitted to the Periyar University, Salem. If the O.P is able to prove the same that the said money were collected and the same was transmitted to the Periyar University, Salem, then complainants have no case, but in the case in hand, the O.P grabbed the money ,that is why, question of taking examination does not arise on that date. This is undoubtedly a glaring example of unfair trade practice  and no one can play with the life of a growing up students in this way. This is a social offence and it should be taken into consideration by any competent court of Law, otherwise, the education which is the backbone of the modern society will be destroyed at any point of time by the hands of this type of O.P who are collecting money without giving any inconvenience to the  complainants to get degree by not travelling to Periyar University, Salem. Sitting in a Bench of Forum we cannot shut our eyes on the realities and we find that it is the duty of the Bench at least to see that the money which has been invested by the complainants to the Study Center, NIMTT, should be refunded with at least bank interest . It is true that  suffering of the students in their early morning of educational life cannot be compensated by monetary value but ,still then we should look forward to give some amount of compensation, so that this type of Study Centre may thing in future not to collect money with the false assurance to give bright academic career to any students in some renowned education center like Periyar University, Salem.

            Before allowing this complaint application we should not forget that O.P has annexed Revision petition no.RP 169/13 ,wherein appellant was NIMTT  and respondent was one Snehasish Bose  and Manav Bharati University . In that case Hon’ble State Commission dismissed the complaint but here in the instant case we have observed that the case of the NIMTT is a study centre and in our considered view study center is not within the purview of University or Board. Moreover, probably Hon’ble State Commission dismissed the complaint which is evident from the last paragraph  “In view of the foregoing discussion it is evident that the impugned order was passed by the District Forum  without proper appreciation of the fact and the settled legal principle  in respect of the matter in hand”.

            Here in the instant case we have categorically discussed the position of university /board in one hand and study centre is another and collection of money by the study centre without remitting the same to the university cannot be considered in the eye of Law that said money was collected by the university ,herein the Periyar University, Salem ,that is why complainant did not make party to the Pariyar University in this case.

            So, facts and circumstances of the revision petition no.RP 169/2013 is completely different in the case in hand ,that is why we are satisfied regarding the allegation of the complainant.

            Considering all pros and cons we find that complainants have been able to prove their case of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice.

            Accordingly, it is

                                                                                    Ordered

That the application under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 is allowed on contest against the O.P.

The O.P NIMTT is directed to refund Rs.33,575/- each to the complainants (in all Rs.67,150/-) with interest @ 8% p.a with effect from 3.11.2012 till its realization within 30 days from the date of this order.

The O.P NIMTT is hereby directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- each to the complainants (in all Rs.20,000/- ) as well as litigation cost of Rs.5000/- each to the complainants ( in all Rs.10,000/-) within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which complainant is at liberty to execute the order through this Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P through speed post.

 

Member                                               Member                                                                       President

 

Dictated and corrected by me

                               

 

                        President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

               

 

 

 

 

 

The judgement in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

 

Ordered

That the application under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 is allowed on contest against the O.P.

The O.P NIMTT is directed to refund Rs.33,575/- each to the complainants (in all Rs.67,150/-) with interest @ 8% p.a with effect from 3.11.2012 till its realization within 30 days from the date of this order.

The O.P NIMTT is hereby directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- each to the complainants (in all Rs.20,000/- ) as well as litigation cost of Rs.5000/- each to the complainants ( in all Rs.10,000/-) within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which complainant is at liberty to execute the order through this Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P through speed post.

 

Member                                               Member                                                                       President