FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT

Smt. SAHANA AHMED BASU, Member,

The case of the Complainants, in short, is that, the Complainant No.2 got admitted in the OP’s College on 17.06.2019 for the Course of B. Com. (H) evening by paying a total Fees of Rs,49,000/- vide Challan No. 015112/01 dated 17.06.2019 for the Session 2019-2020. Due to some unavoidable reasons the Complainant No.2 withdraws admission from the OP’s College on vide Email dated 29.06.2019.The Complainant No.1 requested the OP vide Speed Post letter dated 15.07.2019 to refund the deposited Course Fee through NEFT in favour of the Complainant NO.1. Further on 28.08.2019 the Complainant No.1 sent another Speed Post letter to the OP enclosing a copy of Circular Letter of UGC which stated that the fees collected is refundable if admission is cancelled within a specific time. Again on 16.10.2019 the Complainants sent a Speed Post letter to the OP with complimentary copy of letter to UGC, New Delhi requesting for refunding the deposited fees of Complainant No.2. The UGC, New Delhi had sent a letter dated 18.12.2019 bearing No. F.10-1/2019 (CPP-1) to the OP wherein the UGC requested the OP to refund the admission fee of the Complainant NO2 immediately as per instruction issued by the Ministry of UGC/HRD. Thereafter the Complainants have sent a letter dated 13/01/2020 to the OP for refunding the Admission Fees and the copy of the said letter also forwarded to the Registrar, University of Calcutta,Kolkata – 73. In this regard the Secretary, U.G. Councils, University of Calcutta sent a letter bearing NO. CS/390//Msc.17 dated 16.03.2020 wherein the Secretary requested the OP to follow the instruction of Notification No. F. No. 1-3/2007/(CPP-II) dated 23.04.2007. In reply OP has sent a letter bearing No. No….Rfnd/2019-2020/F-46 dated 03.03.2020 to UGC, New Delhi wherein the OP untruly stated to UGC, New Delhi that the Complainant NO2 has withdrawn admission on 23.07.2019 in place of 29.06.2019. The Complainants wrote one letter dated 23.03.2020 to UGC, New Delhi explaining the facts of the case in details. On receipt of the said letter dated 27.03.2020 UGC, New Delhi wrote to the Registrar, Jadavpur University, Kolkata-32 requesting to look into the matter. The Complainants lodged a complaint to CAD, Kolkata – 87 for mediation of the matter. In this regard CAD, Kolkata – 87 twice called OP on 24.07.2021 and 07.09.2021 but the OP neither present in mediation table nor sent any version in the regards, hence the mediation failed. Therefore, the complainants have no other option to file this case before this Commission praying for relief/reliefs.

            Upon service of notice of the complaint, OP appeared by filing WV and denying the allegations made in the complaint petition. The contention of the OP is thatthe College in question is NAAC compliant and running as a Minority Managed College  and is affiliated with the University of Calcutta which is a non-profit making Institution and runs for the benefit of education. Moreover the entire domain comes under the UGC and not his Commission. This Commission has no jurisdiction to try this matter as Education is not a service. Therefore the student-college relationship cannot come within the ambit of deficiency in service. The plethora of judgement and Catena of judgements pronounced by the Hon’ble National Commission, Hon’ble Supreme Court and various other Courts have stated in clear wordings that these types of dispute do not come within the domain of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. Therefore there is no cause of action of the complainants. The entire exercise is not only futile but also is a wasteful exercise for wasting the valuable time of the Commission.

In support of their case the Complainants have tendered evidence supported by an affidavit and also relied upon documents annexed with the complaint petition. OP did not annex any material documents with the WV and failed to file questionnaire as well as the evidence within stipulated period. We have heard argument on merit and have also perused the record.

Evidently the Complainant No2 had admitted in The Bhawanipur Education Society College by paying a sum of Rs.49,8000/- vide Challan No. 015112/01as Admission & Other Charges, Fees for Semester I, Fees for Semester II and Caution Deposit on 17.06.2019 and cancelled the said Admission vide letter dated 29.6.2019 with a request for allotting the seat  to other needy candidate. Photocopy of the letter dated 15.07.2019 sent by the Complainant No1 addressing the OP goes to show that the complainant made a prayer to refund the Admission Fees in favour of the Complainant NO1 and furnished the bank details.Complainants alleged that thereafter theyhave sent several letters to the OP and intimated the matter to the Director of The Bhawanipur Education Society College and alsoUniversity Grant Commission. Complainants alleged that GurupadaSaren, Secretary, Councils For Undergraduate Studies, University of Calcutta   directed the OP to follow the Instruction of UGC vide letter dated 17.08.2020. Material on documents furnished by the Complainants support this contention. The saidNotificationissued by the UGCstates that:

4. Specific provisions for Mandatory compliance by HEIs:

The Commission herewith lays down specific provisions and consequent mandatory compliance by HEIs:

1. Refund of fees by the Institution concerned in the event of the withdrawal from the programme  by a student; and
2. Verification and non-retention of academic and personal  certificates of student;

For any complaint in respect of (1) & (2) above, the grievance redressal mechanism as prescribed under UGC (Grievance Redressal) Regulations, 2012, shall be followed.

4.1 Refund of Fees

4.1.3 If a student chooses to withdraw from the programme of study in which he/she is enrolled, the institution concerned  shall follow the following five-tier system for the refund of fees* remitted by the student,

S. No.       Percentage of Refund Of fees* Point of time when notice of admission is

                                                                                              received in the HEI

_________________________________________________________________________

1.       100%                                      15 days or more before the formally-notified

2.       90%                                          Less than 15 days before the formally-notified

                                                                  last date of admission

_________________________________________________________________________

3.      80%                                         15 days or less after the formally-notified last

4.      50%                                            30 days or less, but more than 15 days, after

5.     00%                                         More than 30 days after formally-notified last

NOTE:*Cation money and security deposit, which are not part of the fees chargeable, shall be refunded in full.

4.1.4 In case of (1) in the table above, the HEI concerned shall deduct an amount not more than 5% of the fees paid by the student, subject to a maximum of Rs.5,000/- as processing charges from the refundable amount.

4.1.5 Fees shall be refunded by all HEIs to an eligible candidate within fifteen days from the date of receiving a written application from him/ her in this regard.

Complainants alleged that despite said specific notification issued by the UGC the OP remained unturned. On perusal of the record it is found that the OP falsely intimated the U.G.C, New Delhi vide letter No. No….Rfnd/2019-2020/F-46 dated 03.03.2020 that Complainant No.2 has withdrawn admission on 23.07.2019. Photocopy of the postal track report furnished by the Complainants shows that withdrawal intimation was sent to OP on 29.06.2019 and the same was received by the OP on 01.07.2019.

Ld. Advocate for the OP argued that the plethora of Judgements and Catena of Judgements pronounced by the Hon’ble National Commission, Hon’ble Supreme Court and various other Courts have stated in clear wordings that these types of disputes do not come within the domain of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. Therefore this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant Complaint petition. They also craved leave of this Commission to refer to the UGC guidelines, Judgements pronounced by the Hon’ble National Commission, Hon’ble Supreme Court at the time of hearing but after filing WV they did not bother to participate in the legal proceedings. In this regard we may refer the case of Manu Solanki &OrsVs. Vinayaka Mission Uni… whereinthe Hon’ble National Commission held that:

…. We are of the considered opinion that the Institution rendering Education including vocational courses and activities undertaken during the process of pre-admission as well as post-admission and also imparting excursion tours, picnics, extra co-curricular activities, swimming, sport etc. except Coaching Institutions, will, therefore, not be covered under theprovisionsof The Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

In light of the said observation Hon’ble Supreme Court also agreed that Education is not Commodity or Service and Educational Institutions are not Service Provider.

In view of the aforesaid observation we are opined that the instant case is not about imparting knowledge or education andany service rendered for consideration is presumed to be a commercial activity in its broadest sense (including professional activity or quasi-commercial activity). TheHon’ble National Commission, in our opinion, with the utmost respect to the reasoning given therein did not take into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter. In this instant case it is found that the Complainants have deposited money with the OP for entering in the said Institution to avail the desired education. Thus the said Institution has act as a service provider. After withdrawn of the admission within stipulated period and intimating the same to the OP by the Complainants the deposited Admission Fees is not refunded to the Complainants. This act of the OP appears as violation of the UGC guideline regarding refund of the admission fees and the OP also tried to mislead the UGC providing wrong information regarding cancellation date which is nothing but a deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

As such, the Complaint Petition is allowed on contest with the following directions:

1. OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.49,800/- to the complainants with the litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.
2. OP is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.15000/- to the complainant for harassment and mental agony.
3. Abovementioned orders are to be complied with by the OP within 45 days from the date of this order failing which the amount shall attract interest @ 9% p.a. till its realization.If the OPs transgress comply the order within the said period, the Complainant shall be at liberty to put the matter into execution as per Law.

Copy of the judgement be supplied to the parties as per rules. Judgement be uploaded on the website of this Commission forthwith for perusal of the parties.