DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH [Complaint Case No:373 of 2010] Date of Institution : 08.06.2010 Date of Decision :12.12.2011 ====================== Ms. Ashima Soni D/o Sh. Onkar Soni, resident of House No.609, Sector 17, Chandigarh. ---Complainant. V E R S U S 1. Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology, Village Ram Nagar (Near Banur), Distt. Patiala through its Director. 2. The Regional Officer, All India Council For Technical Education, North Western Regional Office, #1310, Sector 42-B, Chandigarh. 3. Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar through its Registrar. ---Opposite Parties. BEFORE: SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SMT. MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER SH. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU MEMBER Argued By: Sh. R. P. Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gagan Aggarwal, Advocate for the complainant. None for the OPs. PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Ms. Ashima Soni has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OP be directed to:- i) Refund a sum of Rs.43,480/- paid as fee along with interest @24% per annum; ii) Pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. iii) Pay costs of litigation. iv) Award any other relief which the Forum deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she got admission in Swami Vivekanand Institute of Engineering and Technology in Information Technology Course for Academic Sessions 2009-2010 and deposited Rs.43,480/- as fee vide receipt dated 12.07.2009 (Annexure C-1). It has been averred that on 09.08.2009, she also got admission in another college in Electronics & Communication Stream. According to the complainant, she never attended any class with OP No.1 and immediately approached OP No.1 on 10.08.2009 for refund of her fee but to no avail. Subsequently, she wrote letter (Annexure C-4) to OP No.1 requesting for refund of the fee. The complainant also wrote letters to OPs No.2 and 3 (Annexures C-6 to C-11) for taking appropriate action against OP No.1 being the superior authorities. According to the complainant, when no refund was made to her, she served a legal notice dated 21.4.2010 upon the OPs but to no effect. According to the complainant, non-refund of the fee by OP No.1 amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. In these circumstances, the present complaint has been filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by OPs No.1 and 3, it has been admitted that the complainant was given admission in OP College in Information Technology course and she deposited the fee of Rs.43,480/- vide receipt dated 12.07.2009. It has been pleaded that she left the course after joining the course for few days. As per the record of OP No.1, the complainant surrendered the seat on 4.8.2009 due to personal reasons. According to OP No.1, the complainant is not entitled for the refund of fee under A.I.C.T.E. Rules, as the seat surrendered by her remained vacant for whole of the session, as is clear from Annexure R-1. According to OP No.1, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. On the date of final hearing, none appeared on behalf of OPs and we proceeded to dispose of the present complaint on merits under Rule 4(8) of the Chandigarh Consumer Protection rules, 1987 read with Section 13(2) of the Consumer protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) in the absence of OPs. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record very carefully. 6. Admittedly, the complainant had taken admission in Information Technology Course in OP No.1 College and had deposited an amount of Rs.43,480/- as fee for the said course. It is also not disputed that the complainant left the course and surrendered the seat on 04.08.2010 and sought refund of fee from the OP No.1 College vide letter dated 10.08.2009. 7. The relevant instructions issued by A.I.C.T.E vide Advt. No.AICTE/ DPC/03(01)/2008 are reproduced as under: - “INSTRUCTIONS TO TECHNICAL INSTITUTIONS, UNIVERSITIES INCLUDING DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITIES IMPARTING TECHNICAL EDUCATION REGARDING MATTERS CONCERNING CHARGES OF FEES, REFUND OF FEES AND OTHER STUDENT RELATED ISSUES. All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) has been empowerd interalia under Section 19(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 directions of Govt. of India issued under section 20(1) of AICTE Act vide Letter No.(U.1(A) Section), it has been decided to issue instructions to the Technical Institutions, Universities including Deemed to be Universities imparting Technical Education in the matters concerning students. Whereas it has come to the notice of the AICTE that Technical Institutions and Universities including Deemed to be Universities are admitting students to technical education programmes long before the actual starting of an academic session, collecting full fee from the admitted students; and retaining their school/institution’s leaving certificates in original; and whereas, Institutions and Universities are also reportedly confiscating the fee paid if a student fails to join by such dates; and, whereas certificates in original are being detained by institutions and Universities to force retention of admitted students; and, whereas the time-limit for students to join the courses/programmes is also being advanced in some cases unrealistically so as to preempt students/candidates from exercising other options of joining other institutions of their choice. In the event of 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 student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only), shall be refunded and returned by the Institution/University to the student/candidate withdrawing from the programme. It would not be permissible for Institutions and Universities to retain the School/Institution Leaving Certificates in 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 Institution must return the fee collected with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent, where applicable. Any violation of instructions issued by the AICTE, shall call for punitive action including withdrawal of approval and recognitition of erring institutions and universities. AICTE shall on its own or on receipt of specific complaints from those affected take all such steps as may be necessary to enforce these directions.” 8. The case of OP No.1 is that as the seat left by the complainant remained vacant for whole of the session, so, she is not entitled to the refund of the fee deposited by her. No documentary evidence, except Annexure R-1, has been placed on record by the OP college to prove that the seat vacated by the complainant remained vacant for whole of the session. 9. It is proved on record from the letters/reminders (Annexures C-4 to C-11) and as per the admission of OP No.1 in its reply that that the complainant surrendered the seat on 04.08.2009 and sought refund. 10. From the bare perusal of the instructions issued by the AICTE, as reproduced above, it is apparent that the Universities including the Deemed Universities and Technical Institutions are duty bound to refund the fee in the event a student withdraws before the start of the course. In the present case, for the best reasons known to OP No.1, the date of start of course has not been mentioned by OP No.1. On the other hand, the complainant has categorically deposed that she made request for refund before starting of the classes. Annexure C-15 is another notice issued by the Registrar, Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar wherein it has been mentioned that the counseling for the existing vacant seats of 1st Year B.Tech/B.Pharma courses of all colleges affiliated to PTU Jalandhar, would take place w.e.f. 07.09.2009. Thus, the course had not started before 07.09.2009 as the counseling was yet to take place for the existing vacant seats from that day. This document corroborates the version of the complainant. Otherwise also, as is evident from Annexures C-13 and C-14, the A.I.C.T.E had also directed OP No.1 to take action and refund the fee as per the AICTE guidelines. In these circumstances, as per the instructions reproduced above, the complainant is entitled for the refund of full fee deposited by her after deducting Rs.1,000/- as administrative charges. 11. Annexure R-1 is simply a tabular chart on a plane paper showing the vacant seats in a particular Branch for the Session 2009-2010. Neither this document bears any stamp of OP No.1 nor is it on its letterhead. Even, this document has not been certified by the counsel so as to treat it as a true copy of its original. Therefore, no authentication can be given to this document, which is not more than a mere piece of paper in the eyes of law. Therefore, OP No.1 college failed to prove on record that the seat surrendered by the complainant remained vacant for whole session. Thus, in our considered opinion, OP No.1 is liable to refund the fee as per U.G.C. Guidelines. 12. The complaint qua OPs No.2 and 3 is liable to be dismissed as no specific allegations have been leveled against these OPs as the fee has been paid by the complainant to OP No.1, who is liable to refund the same. Accordingly, the complaint qua OPs No.2 and 3 is dismissed. 13. In view of the foregoing discussion, the present complaint is allowed and OP No.1 is directed as follows: - (a) to refund the entire fee to the complainant deposited by her with OP No.1 vide receipt dated 12.07.2009 (Annexure C-1) after deducting Rs.1,000/- as administrative charges from the said amount; (b) to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment; (c) to pay a sum of Rs.7,000/- as costs of litigation. 14. The aforesaid order be complied with by OP No.1 within a period of one month from the receipt of its certified copy, failing which OP No.1 shall pay the above said amounts (excluding cost of litigation) along with interest @12% per annum from the date of complainant making application for refund i.e.10.08.2009, till the date of realization, along with the cost of litigation mentioned above. 15. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 12th December 2011. Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER Sd/- (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU) MEMBER Ad/-
[Complaint Case No:373 of 2010] Present: None. --- The case was reserved on 07.12.2011. As per separate detailed order of even date, this complaint has been allowed qua OP No.1 only. However, the complaint qua OPs No.2 and 3 has been dismissed. After compliance file be consigned. Announced. 12.12.2011 Member President Member
| | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MR. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER | | 
