IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 28th day of May, 2022.
Filed on 01.01.2022
Present
- Sri.S.Santhosh Kumar BSc.,LL.B (President )
- Smt.C.K.Lekhamma, B.A.L, LLB (Member)
In
CC/No.02/2022
between
Complainant:- Opposite party:-
Sri. Manoharan.R 1. The C.M.D. Keltron
Krishna Nivas Keltron House
Vettuveni, Harippad.P.O Vellayambalam,
Alappuzha -690 514 Thrivandrum
(Adv. Vishwabhadran)
2. The Director
Keltron Tool room Research
And Training Centre, Keltron
Complex, Aroor-688534
3. The Principal
Keltron Tool room Research
and training Centre, Keltron
Complex, Aroor-688534
(Adv. Jose Y James for Ops)
O R D E R
SRI. S.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PRESIDENT)
Complaint filed u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
1. Complainant’s case briefly stated is as follows:-
Complainant’s son Sanjayraman. M had been a student of the institution known as KELTRAC an autonomous society under Government of Kerala and Keltron during 2017-20 for the course DMT(Diploma in Manufacturing Technology). Complainant belongs to the Thandan community and so they are eligible for fee concession.
2. At the time of admission on 11/9/2017 the college authorities informed that the fee amount of Rs.55,000/- should be paid immediately and that the amount will be refunded as and when free concession is sanctioned. Accordingly complainant remittent an amount of Rs.43,000/- in the respective head of account. Later complainant came to understand that the government had sanctioned the amount and the District office of SC/ST has transferred the amount in the respective head of account of the college. When complainant approached the college authorities for refund of the amount they informed that the amount is credited to the next years fees and will be refunded after completion of the course
3. During the 2nd year when the complainant asked about the amount, they informed that since the college is functioning under the charitable act, the government has stopped the fee concession to SC/ST. When the complainant’s son completed his studies in June 2020 he applied for the transfer certificate and return of the SSLC book, so that he could proceed for the future education of his son. But it was informed that they will give only on remitting the arrears of fees. As such the higher education of the son of the complainant had become impossible for the year 2020/21 onwards.
4. The incident has created great mental agony, unhappiness and financial problems to the complainant and his son. Opposite parties have acted against the promises made in the prospectus published in which it is assured that KELTRAC will provide necessary support and assistance for fee concession to students admitted to AICTE approved courses for availing fee concession from government. The action of the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Though the complainant and his son approached several times before the director and other officials of KELTRAC they insisted on payment of arrears to return the documents. Hence the complaint is filed for giving a direction to the opposite parties to return the SSLC Book/sanction to the TC, direct to refund Rs.43,000/- collected from the complainant towards fee for admission of his son and Rs.2lakhs as compensation.
5. Opposite party filed a version mainly contenting as follows:-
KELTRAC ( Keltron Tool room Research and Training Centre) was established as per GO(MS No.163/01/ID dtd. 5/12/2021 and is registered under the scientific and charitable society act,1955. It is presided by Hon’ble Minister for Industries and members are Secretaries in various department of the Govt. of Kerala. There are two courses such as Diploma in tool and die making & Diploma in manufacturing Technology approved by the AICTE and students are admitted for the same. As per the order No. A10/8719/08 dtd. 15/7/2009 of the Asst. District Scheduled Cast Development Officer fee concession was granted during the year 2008-09 and it was continued till 2017-18. However initial payments are collected from them and later it will be reimbursed.
6. Sanjayraman joined the course for 2017-18 in Diploma in Manufacturing Technology and attended classes from 11/9/2017. He is entitled for fee concession and an application was filed on 9/2/2018. Other students of the same batch applied for the fee concession much earlier and they received the same. Sanjayraman filed the application for the 1st year along with other students application for the 2nd year. Hence he was not granted fee concession and hostel fees also in arrears. From 2018-19 onwards e-grant is not allotted to this institution on account of Govt. Order. Sanjayraman has to pay an amount of Rs.80,000/- on account of tuition fees and Rs.43,826/- on account of hostel fees. Inspite of repeated request the amount was not paid. Certificates will be released only on payment of arrears. The institution is working using the fee collected from the students. Hence complainant may be directed to clear the entire arrears and receive certificates.
7. On the above pleading following points were raised for consideration.
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties as alleged?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get a direction for return of documents from the opposite parties as prayed for?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get a direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs.43,000/- collected from him for the admission of his son?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to realize an amount of Rs.2 lakhs as compensation from the opposite parties?
5. Reliefs and cost?
8. Evidence in this case consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts.A1 toA6 from the side of the complainant. Opposite parties have not adduced any oral evidence Ext.B1 to B9 were marked from their side.
9. Points No.1 to 4:-
Sri. Sanjayraman who is the son of Pw1 , the complainant joined the 2nd opposite party M/s Keltron Tool room Research and Training Centre(KELTRAC in short) for Diploma in Manufacturing Technology course(DMT in short) for the period during 2017-2020. The institution belong to 1st opposite party M/s Keltron and 3rd opposite party is the principle of 2nd opposite party. As per the prospectus all students admitted to AICTE approved courses were eligible for fee concession. Complainant belongs to Hindu Thandan Community, which is a Scheduled Caste Community and he is eligible for fee concession. However at the time of admission opposite parties demanded an amount of Rs.55,000/- on a contention that the fee will be refunded as and when concession is sanctioned by the government. Accordingly PW1 remitted an amount of Rs.43,000/-. Though Sanjayraman applied for fee concession it was not granted by the 2nd opposite party. While so Sanjayraman completed his course and demanded back the documents such as SSLC Book, which was entrusted at the time of admission and transfer certificate. Opposite parties did not issue the same on a contention that tuition fees as well as hostel fees are due from the student. Though Pw1 made complaints before the Hon’ble Human Rights Commission and Govt. of Kerala his complaint was not redressed. Finally he has approached this Commission for a direction to return the documents collected at the time of admission, to return Rs.43,000/- which was collected as tuition fees and compensation for Rs.2 lakhs on various accounts. Opposite parties filed a joint version contenting that the institution is registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary Scientific & Charitable Society Act.1955 and it is conducting two courses approved by the AICTE. Sri.Sanjayraman had joined for DMT course during the year 2017-18. Though he is entitled for fee concession being a student belonging to Scheduled Caste, he applied for e-grant belatedly and so application was not considered for the 1st year. From the 2nd year onwards ie, (from 2018-19) the fee concession was denied from the District Scheduled Cast Development Office on a contention that there is no specific government order for the same. Now an amount of Rs. 80,000/- being on account of tuition fees and an amount of Rs.43,826/- as hostel fees is due from Sanjayraman, and inspite of repeated request the amount was not paid. Hence the certificates were not returned and NOC was not issued. So it was requested to inform Sanjayraman to pay the entire dues to the 2nd opposite party and collect the certificates. Complainant got examined as PW1 and marked Ext.A1 to A6. Opposite party did not adduce any oral evidence Ext.B1 to B9 were marked.
10. The fact that Sanjayraman who is son of the complainant was a student of 2nd opposite party KELTRAC for DMT course during 2017-2020 is not in dispute. It is also not disputed that PW1 belonging to Thandan community and is eligible for fee concession. It is also an admitted case that Rs. 43000/- was collected from the complainant at the time of admission. Ext.A1 is the prospectus of 2nd opposite party from which it is revealed that fee concession is available for students admitted to AICTE approved courses. Ext.A3 series will show that an amount of Rs. 43,000/- was collected from PW1 and Rs.3000/- was collected as part payment of hostel fees. Ext.A5 community certificate will show that Pw1 belongs to Thandan caste which is a scheduled caste approved by the Govt. of Kerala. So as per Ext.A1 prospectus Sanjayraman is entitled for fee concession. Ext.A6 is a letter issued to complainant by the District Scheduled Cast Development officer from which it is revealed that though amount was sanctioned to KELTRAC as fee concession to Sanjayraman during the 1st year of the DMT course, since though government order was not produced. KELTRAC is not entitled for fee concession. So from the evidence on record it can be seen that though amount was allowed for the 1st year to 2nd opposite party for transferring the same to complainant’s son since there was no specific order it could not be transferred and that the Scheduled Cast Development Co-operation is taking steps to collect back the amount. So it can be seen that opposite parties are not in a position to grant fee concession to the complainant son since there was no specific government order. In Ext.A1 prospectus it is only stated that fee concession is available for AICTE approved courses and that 2nd opposite party will provide the necessary support and assistance required. So it is for the complainant to approach the necessary authorities to get fee concession and opposite parties cannot be blamed for the same.
11. Ext.B5 is a letter dtd.4/4/2019 issued by the Asst. District Scheduled Caste Development Officer to 3rd opposite party stating that students who got admitted in the management quota in self financing colleges are not eligible for e-grant benefit. Ext.B6 is a letter dtd. 9/9/2020 adduced to the 2nd opposite party by the Principle Secretary Government of Kerala stating that fee concession was granted up to 2017-18 and thereafter since there is no specific order the students are not eligible for fee concession. Ext.A8 will show that 2nd opposite party had sent a letter on 24/12/2019 to the 1st opposite party for taking necessary steps for granting fee concession for the students. So from the records produced from the side of the opposite party it is revealed that 2nd opposite party had taken necessary steps for getting fee concession for the eligible students However since there is no specific order for granting fee concession, they are not in a possession to grant the same to the students.
12. The 1st relief sought in the complaint is to return the SSLC book and transfer certificate without insisting the remittance of fees. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant filed a detailed argument note in which a copy of letter dtd. 29/3/2019 of the member secretary All India Council for Technical Education is enclosed. In the said letter it is stated that some institutions are withholding the original certificate of students cancelling their admission at any point of time and demanding fees for subsequent years. This is a clear violation of AICTE norms and attract strict punity action. He has also relied upon to unreported decisions of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala. The 1st decision is dtd. 20/2/2017 in Sherif M.D Vs. State of Kerala in WPC No. 1275 of 2017 (H) dtd. 19/6/2010. Granting the writ petition the Hon’ble High Court held as follows:-
“ In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the third respondent is directed to issue to the petitioners, all the certificates that are issued to similarly placed candidates who have completed MBBS Course from the College. All the original certificates of the petitioners collected at the time of their admissions shall also be released to them. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this judgment will not preclude the college from instituting appropriate civil suits against the petitioners for realization of the amounts due to the college in terms of the bond executed by the petitioners.”
13. A similar view was taken in WPC No.24526 of 2013 dtd/25/5/2012 in Tisina school vs. School of communications and others. Though W(A)1669 of 2013 was filed against the order referred 2nd above, it was dismissed on 1/11/2013. Hence it can be safely concluded that opposite parties have no right to withhold the certificates such as SSLC book submitted at the time of taking admission and they have no authority to withhold the transfer certificate with respect to Sanjayraman. Even if fees are due from him it is for them to realize the same by other modes and the certificates cannot be withhold as a security. However regarding the return of fee collected from Sanjay Raman, evidence on record shows that it is for the government to decide whether students of the 2nd opposite party is eligible for fee concession. It is left open for the complainant to approach appropriate authorities for getting the same if he is entitled for fee concession being a person belonging to scheduled cast community. Hence no order can be passed for returning the fee collected from Sanjayraman. These points are found accordingly.
14. Point No.5:-
In the result complaint is allowed in part.
a) Opposite parties 2 and 3 are directed to return the SSLC book and sanction the Transfer Certificate of Sanjayraman without insisting the remittance of fees.
b) Complainant is allowed to realize an amount Rs.2000/- as cost from the opposite parties 2 and 3.
The order shall be complied forthwith from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 28th day of May, 2022.
Sd/-Sri.S.SanthoshKumar(President)
Sd/-Smt.C.K.Lekhamma (Member)
Appendix:-Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Manoharan (Complainant)
Ext.A1 - Copy of Prospectus
Ext.A2 series - Receipts
Ext.A3 - Notice dtd.24/11/2021
Ext.A4 - Letter dtd. 14/2/2020
Ext.A5 - Community Certificate
Ext.A6 - Letter dtd 23/12/2021
Evidence of the opposite parties:-
Ext.B1 - Copy of Certificate of Registration
Ext.B2 - True copy of order issued from Govt. of Kerala for
KELTRAC Project.
Ext.B3 - True copy of AICTE Approval of KELTRAC
Ext.B4 - True copy of Extension of Approval order for 2013 to 2014.
Ext.B5 - Copy of Letter dtd.4/4/2019
Ext.B6 - Copy of Letter dtd. 9.9.2020
Ext.B7 - Copy of Letter dtd. 12/9/2018
Ext.B8 - Copy of Letter dtd. 24/12/2019
Ext.B9 - Copy of Letter from complainant to KELTRAC
//True Copy ///
To
Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.
By Order
Assistant Registrar
Typed by:- Br/-
Compared by:-
