Orissa

Rayagada

CC/490/2015

Mr. Shakti Prasad Dash - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Director Presidency College, - Opp.Party(s)

Self

01 Aug 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

                                           

                                                  C.C. Case  No.490/ 2015.

                                                                       

 P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.                                      Member.

Mr. Shakti Prada Dash, S/o Sri S.K.Dash, AT: Dera Street,P.O.Gunupur-765022,Dist.Rayagada,Odisha.

                                                                                                                        …….Complainant

                                                            Vrs.

1.         Director, Presidency College, Goutam Nagar, Andhra Bank Back Side, At/Po Berhampur, Dist. Ganjam, Orissa.

2.         Director, Madurai Kamraj University, Directorate of Distance Education, E.D.P       Admission             Section,Madurai-625021.(India)                                                                                                                                                                                             …..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:

For the complainant: In Person

For the O.P No.1: Sri A.K.Panda & Associate Advocate, Berhampur.

For the O.P No.2.: Exparte

 

                                                            JUDGMENT

The case of the complainant is that the complainant joined as a student of O.p No.1  for the Course of B.Sc.(Mathematics) and admission was made by the O.P 1. As  per the  instruction of O.P. No.1  the complainant deposited Rs.2450/-  as admission fees and Rs.35,000/- towards institution fees for distance  education.  The amount has been deposited with the Enrolment No.12A4600096. After two months of admission , as per the instruction of the O.p No.1, the complainant further deposited Rs.2200/-  for 2^nd year  and Rs.2200/- for 3^rd year.  As per the instruction of the O.P 1 the complainant appeared all the examination for three years but after completion of all the examination the complainant waited for the results and a at last on 2014  the complainant also paid Rs.7,000/-  as an additional amount for publication of result but till yet he O.ps have not published the result. The complainant approached the O.P 1 for publication of result immediately as the complainant  is interested for employment but the approaches of the complainant futile. Then the complainant approached with the O.p 2 for publication  result   but the O.P 2 also  not taken any action for which the complainant suffered a lot.  Hence, prayed to direct the O.ps to publish the result  and supply the copies of the mark sheet, original certificate and pass certificate  and award compensation of Rs.50,000/-  for mental agony and award other reliefs as the forum deems fit. Hence, this complaint.

Being noticed, the O.p No.1 appeared through their advocate and filed written version inter alia denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars. The O.P No.1 neither appeared nor filed written version as such the O.p 2 was set exparte. It is stated by the O.P No.1  that the complaint petition is not maintainable being the complainant is not a consumer.  The complainant neither studied nor a student under the college of O.P 1 so also neither deposited any amount as admission fees for study nor any amount deposited as any course fees  or examination fees in the O.P No.1 College, similarly the complainant never paid any additional amount for publication of result in the college of O.P No.1.The university authority  of the studied course is the only person having right to give or cancel admission and result or receive remit and return any such cash in any form to his students but not the O.p. No.1 where he has got no role to play even as his  institution  is no way concern with the allegation. The O.P No.1 is no way concern  for publication of any result for the course of the complainants examination and for that approach of complainant to O.P No.1  at any point of time does not arise. Therefore, the O.P 1 prays to peruse the entire document available on record and  dispose of  this petition  as a preliminary issue  about the maintaibility of the case and  delete the O.P 1 from the proceeding and pass order  against the complainant  in the interest of justice.

                                                FINDINGS

We perused the complaint petition  and version filed by both the parties. Heard from the complainant and the Opp.Party No.1. The O.P No.2  did not appear  after several call. It is the case of the complainant that he complainant has paid total amount of Rs.48,850/- to the O.P No.1 and the complainant filed an affidavit regarding the same and the O.P No.1  admitted the complaint before the O.P No.2 university and given the enrolment number to the complainant and the complainant also appeared all the examination through the O.P No.1 and passed  in one examination.  The O.Ps  have  not given the certificate  and as per the courses offered by them they have not completed the total courses. But in its reply the O.P 2 remained silent and denied  and refused all the facts of the complaint.  He has not admitted the student  and his institution is no way  concern with the allegation. After hearing both the side we are of the opinion that as the O.P No.1  has denied the matters  and it seems that  the intention of the  fraud and unfair trade practice in the name of providing good education.

                  Regarding whether  the complainant is a consumer , it is clearly basing on the principles,  which is laid down and reported on 2011(2) CPR-94(NC) and  reported in 2005(I)OLR(CSR)-71 that, “ Educational Institution imparting education by an educational institution falls within the ambit of service as defined in the act.  A Student who takes admission in the educational institution hires the service of the educational institution for consideration he/she is a consumer as defined under the Act.” Hence, the complainant is a consumer and in view of the above, the opposite parties are directed to give the certificate  along with the mark sheet of the complainant  on free of cost. Hence, it is ordered.

 

                                                         ORDER

                        In view of the above discussion, the O.Ps are directed to issue the B.Sc. Certificate along with the mark sheet  and as the O.Ps delayed the matter  and playing with the life of the student, they are  jointly and severally responsible for the same.  Hence, the O.ps are directed to pay  Rs.10,000/- each towards the cost  of litigation and compensation  towards the mental agony      to the complainant . If the O.ps fail to give the certificate  of B.Sc. within thirty days they are liable to pay the entire expenses of the complainant with 5% interest till its  payment. The O.Ps are directed to make the aforesaid payment within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to take further proceeding U/s 25 and 27 of the C.P.Act.

 

            Pronounced in open forum today on this 12^th of July,2016 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

 

            Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

 

By the complainant:

1. Copy of admission order
2. Affidavit of complainant
3. Copy of  Hall Ticket Identification Certificate
4. Copy of Statement of marks.

 

By the O.Ps. Nil

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                President