In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 318 / 2009.
1) Sri Kaushal Kumar Singh,
Hind Motor Security Barrack No. 1,
Hind Motor, Hooghly, Pin-712233. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) The Institution of Engineers (India),
Service through the Secretary & Director General,
8, Gokhel Road, Kolkata-700020. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member
Order No. 2 4 Dated 22/02/2012.
The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Kaushal Kumar Singh against the o.p. The Institute of Engineers (India). The case of the complainant in short is that complainant took admission of diploma engineering course comprising Sec A and B under the o.p. The degree was recognized and equivalent to engineering by the Government of India and also almost all the State Government. Complainant who is a service holder took admission for diploma in mechanical engineering by paying requisite fees. At the time of admission there was no time limit prescribed for clearing Sec A and B examination. And for Sec B a member was required to appear in examination for clearing 10 subjects provided a member could not appear for more than 4 subjects in an examination. Complainant cleared Sec A course in the year 1999 and result was declared on 30.9.1999.
Thereafter from 2005 a new rule and syllabus was introduced. According to new rule a member was required to clear Sec A examination within 6 years and Sec B within another 6 years. The number of subject in the new syllabus came down to 9 from 10 as was originally there under the old rule. Complainant completed Sec A examination and cleared part of Sec B examination before introduction of new rule in 2005. In 2009 finally complainant appeared for 2 remaining papers of Sec B under the old syllabus and secured 50 marks i.e. pass mark in one paper, but failed to obtain the required marks for having pass in the last paper of Sec B and as such, he failed to obtain the diploma engineering degree. Complainant applied for revaluation of the last paper and the o.p. did not allow him to appear only in manufacturing technology paper in which he failed to secure pass marks. O.p. instructed him to appear at all the 9 papers and passed successively within 6 years as per new rules and regulations. Complainant requested through different letters and through lawyer’s letter to allow him to appear at single paper which he could not succeed. But o.p. did not allow him to do so. Hence, the instant case.
O.p. had entered it appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular wherefrom we find that complainant was a student under o.p. in the said stream and o.p. succeeded in 9 papers and could not in a single paper and this position has not been disputed by either of the parties to this case. O.p. has specifically stated that Human Resources Deptt., Govt. of India vide their letter no.18-31/90 TD-5 dt.20.4.1993 issued direction that a candidate should not be allowed for an indefinite period for complete his course for Sec A and B examination and following that council in his 570th meeting held at Chandigarh approved 6 years to pass Sec A and further 6 years to pass Sec B and 2 years extension was allowed in case of old candidates. But from the running page 17 filed by o.p. together with w/v the application for extension of examination registration 109478 wherein complainant gave undertaking that after availing of the extension period of 2 years to clear his single paper to complete his examination he shall forfeit his right to claim over this previous examination in the existing scheme and he shall be bound to surrender his revised identity card to the institution. It is evident from the record that the students of such institution are mostly service holders and they undertook studies for a period of 14 years availing of 2 years extension and the complainant has already underwent studies for 14 years.
Considering entire materials on record and especially having regards to the factum of the provision of extension of 2 years we are of the view that complainant should be given an opportunity to clear of his single paper for the administration of justice and o.p. authority can very much take up the matter with the Human Resources Deptt., Govt. of India for his case as a special one allowing him a chance to appear at and clear his unsuccessful paper in relaxation to normal rules of the Human Resources Deptt., Govt. of India, otherwise the long drawn endeavour of the complainant for completion of the course will go frustrated and natural justice demands as such in the context of the facts and circumstances disclosed on record.
Hence, ordered,
The petition of complaint is allowed on contest with cost against the o.p. O.p. is hereby directed to take up the matter with the Human Resources Deptt., Govt. of India or appropriate authority with a prayer for allowing the complainant to clear the unsuccessful paper by affording him a chance in relaxation of normal rules as a special case within 9 months. This is passed keeping an eye to natural justice.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
_____Sd-_____ ______Sd-_______
MEMBER PRESIDENT
