DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

Ms. Reetu Stephen d/o Sh. Gulshan Stephen, resident of #415-B, Block-B, Railway Colony, Amritsar.

                                                                   ---Complainant

Vs

[1]      T&A Overseas Consultant (P) Ltd., SCO No. 126-127 (Basement), Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through Managing Director.

[2]          Director, Foreign Horizons, SCO No. 126-127 (Basement), Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.

---- Opposite Parties

BEFORE:          SH.LAKSHMAN SHARMA                PRESIDENT

MRS.MADHU MUTNEJA              MEMBER

                    SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU                    MEMBER

Argued By:       Sh. R.K. Sharma, Advocate for the Complainant.

Sh. H.S. Saini, Advocate for the Opposite Parties.

PER MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER

1.                 This is a Complaint regarding alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the Opposite Parties for not being able to provide a work permit to the Complainant.

                    The Complainant had engaged the services of the Opposite Parties for seeking a work permit for employment in Australia. As per the Complainant, she has paid Rs.25,000/-  (initial deposit); Rs.49,999/- (registration charges to be deposited with the Nursing Board of Victoria in Australia at Melbourne), Rs.1.00 lac and Rs.2.25 lacs to the Opposite Parties for obtaining the said work permit. The Complainant had alleged that the actual fees to be deposited with Nursing Board of Victoria in Australia was only AUS $ 145 which is about Rs.5075/-. Also, the Opposite Parties have not issued any receipt of Rs.2.25 lacs which was supposed to be for purchase of air tickets. The Complainant eventually purchased air-ticket from her own pocket.

                    On reaching Australia, the Complainant reported in the Occupational English Test (for brevity ‘O.E.T.’) course classes at Melbourne (Australia) on 26.5.2009. She later visited the Registrar of Nurses Board of Victoria at Melbourne to check her registration status. She was informed that papers received on her behalf from the Opposite Parties were incomplete and her file had been rejected/ cancelled.  The Complainant thus continued with the course of OET for which she herself paid a fee of AUS $ 528 equivalent to Rs.18,000/-. After completing the test, the Complainant contacted the Australian Govt. to extend her visa or convert her visa into a work permit but the officials refused to do so as her papers had not been sent in accordance with the requirements. The Complainant also tried to contact the Opposite Parties a number of times from Melbourne Australia, but she never got any positive response from them.  Eventually, the Complainant had to return to India, without getting the work permit. The Complainant then requested the Opposite Parties to refund the amount charged by them. As per the Complainant initially the Opposite Parties agreed to refund the amount, but actually have not refunded anything to her.  Hence, this complaint. 

                    Besides the receipts the Complainant has placed on record letter dated 17.06.2009 (Ex.C-6) from the Registrar, Nurses Board of Victoria, Melbourne Victoria, Australia, to prove her allegations. The letter being important, is reproduced as under: -

“On behalf of the Nurses Board of Victoria (The Board), I write to alert you to some serious matters that have come to the attention of the Board in relation to several international recruitment agents acting on behalf of internationally qualified nurses seeking registration in the state of Victoria. 

In relation to your current application for registration, we note you have Foreign Horizons acting on your behalf. Through our current investigation process it has come to our attention that Foreign Horizons appear to be providing information to nurses that in some circumstance is not accurate and will not allow the nurse to register in Victoria.

I encourage you to contact the Nurses Board of Victoria personally to discuss your current application to ensure you are receiving accurate information and such that the Board can assist you in your application process.”

                    The Complainant has also placed on record a notice dated 23.10.2009 issued by the Opposite Parties at Ex.C-8 regarding defaming and misbehaviour by the Complainant, which shows the attitude of the Opposite Parties towards her. She has also placed on record the legal notice dated 11.04.2010 (Ex.C-9) issued by her to the Opposite Parties for playing a fraud on her.

2.                 After admission of the complaint, notices were sent to the Opposite Parties.

3.                 Opposite Parties in their joint reply have completely denied the allegations of the Complainant. According to them, the Complainant had approached them to seek guidance and professional help to settle in Australia.  As the Opposite Parties were equipped to provide unique programme under which a qualified nurse could get admission in Australia and get registered as a qualified nurse for a total package of Rs.4.00 lacs, the package was taken by the Complainant.

                    Opposite Parties have admitted receipt of all amounts paid by the Complainant to them even though the receipt of Rs.2.25 lacs is not on record. Opposite Parties have stated that they have charged Rs.25,000/- for their professional fee; Rs.1.00 lac paid by the Complainant was paid to the Care Globe International for providing and arranging for the internship, other documentation as well as hostel/ residential facilities for the candidate; Rs.2.25 lacs was the course fee. The Nursing Board Australia had given clearance to the visa case of the Complainant in Feb. 2009 and the Complainant was enrolled at the Melbourne Language Centre as a student. The details of the payments required to be given by the Complainant is at Annexure R-1.

                    Opposite Parties have further denied the surprise of the Complainant that she has got only a student visa, as she had herself signed the application form before the Embassy. Also the registration of a candidate with the Nursing Board is not complete till the time the candidate clears the O.E.T. course. Only after completion of course and registration with Nursing Board, the visa of the Complainant could be extended. The Complainant has not attached any document or certificate regarding clearing the O.E.T. Exam. Opposite Parties have alleged that as per their knowledge, the Complainant was not able to complete the course and hence, could not get the relevant approval for registration. In fact, she returned to India on 30.8.2009, without completing the course of her own.  She has thereafter been harassing the Opposite Parties and asking for refund of her amount. Opposite Parties have further stated that they are registered and licenced companies as per the Immigration Act and the registration certificate and copy of the licences have been placed at Annexure   R-2 and R-3 respectively. As per the agreement between the parties, Opposite Parties were required to arrange the visa for the Complainant to Australia and get admission for her in O.E.T. enabling her to get herself registered as a qualified nurse in Australia. Denying all other allegations, the Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of complaint.      

4.                 Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.                 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

6.                 Comparing the allegations of the Complainant along with the payments made, as well as reply the Opposite Parties along with the details of amount used by them, it is confirmed that Rs.25,000/- paid by the Complainant is for the consultancy provided to her by the Opposite Parties and Rs.1.00 lac is towards fee for payment to the Care Globe International. The details of the other payments have not been explained.  Opposite Parties have also not placed on record any receipt from the Care Globe International to show the payment made by them on behalf of the Complainant. However, as the Complainant has done the course at the said Institute, the benefit of doubt for this Rs.1.00 lac in favour of the Opposite Parties be given, especially considering the letter at Annexure R1. The usage of rest of the amount has not been explained by the Opposite Party. Therefore, the allegations of the Complainant about over charging by the Opposite Parties are not rebutted.

7.                 The Complainant has also alleged that she had wished for work permit; whereas the Opposite Parties only provided her with a student visa. As there is no contract placed on record by either of the parties, the factum of this allegation cannot be proved. The letter placed on record by the Complainant at Ex. C-6, which has also been reproduced above, clearly shows that the Nurses Board of Victoria is doubtful about the good office of the Opposite Parties and has warned the Complainant against proceeding with her case through them.

8.                 The alleged notice regarding defamation and misbehaviour by the Complainant with the Opposite Parties as well as initiation of criminal proceedings against the Opposite Parties are beyond the purview of this Forum.

9.                 Summing up the entire issue, we can come to the conclusion that the amount paid by the Complainant to the Opposite Parties is far in excess of the amount actually used by them on her behalf for forwarding to the various agencies in Australia. Hence, after deducting Rs.25,000/- as professional fee and Rs.1.00 lac paid by the Opposite Parties to the Care Globe International, the rest of the amount paid by the Complainant be refunded to her by the Opposite Parties.

                    As per the receipts available on record, the Complainant has made the following payments: -

                    In addition to above amounts, the Complainant has paid Rs.2.25 lacs against which no receipt was issued to her, but the Opposite Parties in Para 3 have admitted that the balance amount of course fee amounting to Rs.2.25 lacs was paid by the Complainant in March, 2009.  The complete package was for Rs.4.00 lacs as stated by the Opposite Parties in Para No.1. This whole amount totals to  Rs.3,99,997/-. Out of this amount, after deducting Rs.1.25 lacs, the balance amount be paid to the Complainant.   

10.               Accordingly, we allow this complaint in the light of the discussion given above and direct the Opposite Parties to refund        Rs.2,74,997/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which they shall be liable to pay the awarded amount along with an interest @12% per annum from the date of this order, till the date of payment. No compensation or costs.    

11.               Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

28^th March, 2012.                                                

Sd/-

(LAKSHMAN SHARMA)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

(MADHU MUTNEJA)

MEMBER

Sd/-

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)