DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No.119/2012
Shri Dev Pratap Singh
S/o Sh. K. P. Singh
R/o 115/1, Kewa Puri Sarvat Road,
Distt. Muzaffarpur ….Complainant
Versus
1. Sri Sharda Institute of Indian Management
Plot No.7, Phase-II, Behind the Grand Hotel,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070
2. All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
Through its Director
07th Floor, Chandra Lok Building,
Janpath, New Delhi ….Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 26.03.12 Date of Order : 20.04.19
Coram:
Sh. A.S. Yadav, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER
- Briefly put, the Complainant Dev Pratap Singh applied for a two years PGDM course approved by AICTE (OP No.2) with Sri Sharda Institute of Indian Management Research & Anr. hereinafter referred to as OP No.1 for 2011-2013 session. The complainant deposited the registration fee of Rs.20,000/- and admission fee of Rs.25,000/- with the OP No.1 vide receipt No.14086 dated 18.07.11 annexed as Annexure-B.
- Due to certain unavoidable circumstances the complainant was not able to attend classes which was duly informed to OP-1 15 days prior to commencement of teaching session. Thereafter the complainant asked OP No.1 to refund fee to him as he had not proceeded with the PGDM course but the same was not refunded. The complainant made several requests thereafter. When even after six months the fee was not refunded the complainant made a complaint dated nil to the Complaint Cell of OP No.2 informing them about all the facts but no action was taken by them.
- Thus, aggrieved, the complainant approached the Forum with the prayer to direct OP No.1 to refund the entire fee amount of Rs.45,000/- alongwith interest. Additionally to direct the OP No.1 to pay Rs.2 lakhs by way of compensation for harassment alongwith the cost of the litigation.
- OP-1 was proceeded exparte on 30.04.14. OP No.2 filed its reply and thereafter was proceeded exparte on 23.01.15.
- Complainant filed exparte evidence and written arguments.
- Averments made in the complaint and evidence led by the complainant have remained uncontroverted and unchallenged qua OP No.1. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.
- Having heard the submissions of the complainant and perusing the record it is observed that the total fee of Rs.45,000/- was not refunded; despite the complainant informing OP No.1 15 days prior to the commencement of the classes about is inability to join the institute. It is noticed that the institute of OP No.1 is approved by All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Ministry of HRD, Govt. of India; under AICTE Act, 1987 (OP No.2). The OP No.2 in its reply to the complaint has admitted that AICTE is established with a view to proper planning and coordinated development of the technical education system throughout the country. Section 10 of the AICTE Act confers power on the Council to take all necessary steps to prevent commercialization of technical education.
- It is next noticed that AICTE has issued instructions vide public notice to the Technical Institutions, Universities including deemed to be universities imparting Technical Education regarding matters concerning refund of fees, return of original certificate and other students related issues which reads as under:
“All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE) has been empowered inter-alia under section 10 (n) of AICTE Act to take all necessary steps to prevent commercialization of technical education. In compliance with the provisions under AICTE Act and in the light of direction of Govt. of India issued under section 20 (1) of AICTE Act vide letter No. ( U.1 (A) Session),it has been decided to issue instructions to the AICTE approved technical institutions, in the matter concerning students….
In the event of a student/candidate withdrawing before the starting of the course,the wait listed candidates should be given admission against the vacant seat.The entire fee collected from the students, after a deduction of processing fee of not more than Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) shall be refunded and returned by the Institution/ to the student/candidate withdrawing from the Programme. It would not be permissible for institutions to retain the school/institution leaving certificate in the original. Should a student leave after joining the course and if the seat consequently falling vacant has been filled by another candidate by the last date of admission,the institutions must return the fee collected with proportionatedeductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, wherever applicable..”
Copy of the Public Notice Advertisement No.1 AICTE/DPG/06 (2)/2009 is annexed as Annexure R-2.
- As per these guidelines and keeping in view that the complainant did not attend a single class and infact withdrew his name 15 days prior to the commencement of the session, we are of the opinion that it is rather unfair on the part of OP No.1 to retain the entire fee deposited. We hold OP-1 guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. We allow the complaint against OP No.1 and direct OP No.1 to retain Rs.1,000/- as per AICTE norms and refund the balance amount of Rs.44,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum. The amount be paid from the date of filing of the complaint till realization within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which OP-1 shall have to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till realization on the said amount of Rs.44,000/-. Additionally OP-1 is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- by way of compensation and litigation cost.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 20.04.19
