BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR
C.C NO-44/2013
Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Smita Tripathy,Member (W).
Kishore Chandra Besan,
S/O-Sukdev Besan,
R.O-Telecom Colony,P.O-Town,
Dist-Sambalpur. …..Complainant
Vrs.
1. Principal,
Amresh Patel Industrial Training Institute,
Shanti Vihar,Majhipali,Debeipali,
P.S-Sason,Dist-Sambalpur.
2. The Secretary,
State Council for Technical
Education & Vocational Training,
Odisha,Unt-viii,NeasrRaj Bhawan,
Bhubaneswar-12(Odisha). …O.Ps
Counsels:-
- For the Complainant:- Sri A.K. Tripathy, Advocate & Associates.
- For the O.P-1 :- Sri D.Hota, Advocate & Associates.
- For the O.P-2 :- Sri B.K.Dash, Advocate & Associates
DATE OF HEARING : 03.03.2021, DATE OF ORDER : 12.04.2021
SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:-Brief facts of the case is that the that the O.P-1 is an Industrial Training Institute which provides vocational education facilities to different students under the O.P-2. The Complainant is students of the O.Ps in Electrical Trade vide Roll No—9 and aid prescribe admission fees to the O.P-1 for the session 2010-11 and 2011-12. At the time of admission in 2010 in to the said Institution the Complainant has submitted all his educational certificates with the O.P-1 but in the year 2011 again the O.P-1 asked to submit all the relevant documents for the second time for the verification of the O.P-2 so that the registration number could be issued in his name to enable him to appear in the final examination 2012 and the complainant did accordingly. On verification the date of birth was found to be mismatched in documents. The Complainant submitted the Board Certificate and mark sheet from Board of Secondary Education of Orissa on dtd. 14.01.2011. But unfortunately the Complainant was not issued any registration number in spite all the formalities rather assured by the O.P-1 to resolve the problem. In the year 2012 the O.P-1 allowed the Complainant for From Fill up on payment of Rs.3,000/- without issuing registration number for which the O.P-2 neither issued Admit Card nor Registration number as a result the Complainant could not be able to appear in the final examination. The reason of the above was enquired in to and came up with a remark that due to non-submission of relevant original documents at the of verification, the same were not issued to him. Information under RTI was sought by the Complainant. On enquiry it was found that the Complainant has submitted his original documents after making necessary correction from the competent authority, with the O.P-1. But the necessary documents were not sent by the O.P-1 to the O.P-2 for its verification for which the admit card and registration number were not issued. But from the letter no-6589 dtd. 14.09.2011 issued by the Assistant Controller of Examination & Public Information Officer of SCTE & VT, Odisha, Bhubaneswar is is informed that the O.P-1 on dtd. 25.06.2012 has sent request to the O.P-2 through letter no- APITC/128/2012 for verification of original documents of the Complainant, which was not considered by the Authority (O.P-2)on belated stage. Due to the negligence of the O.P-1 the Complainant has lost 2 valuable years of his study which amount to gross negligence and deficiency in service by the O.P-1. False and fabricated letters vide no- APITC/132/2012 dtd. 18.12.2012 was availed to the Complainant through the RTI prepared by the O.P-1 where he claims to have asked the Complainant to submit documents within seven days just to save his skin. Hence the Complainant claims refund of Rs.30,000/- that was invested towards admission fees and RS. 1,50,000 towards compensation financial loss, mental agony, loss of two valuable academic years and physical pain. As prayed in the petition.
As per the O.P-1 the Complainant has submitted the photocopy of the educational qualification certificates and taken away the original with him after verification. It is the duty of the O.P-2 to issue registration number to the students after maintaining some parapharnia. The date of birth was not matched with the matriculation certificate board certificates. He was asked to furnish corrected and rectified the certificate in time but the complainant did not submit it with time. The O.p-1 has written letters on dtd. 11.04.2012 and on dtd. 25.06.2012 to the O.P-2 for verification of the document and issue of registration number which were received by the O.P-2 but did not reply. The money of Rs.2,000/- received towards the form fill up in the year 2012 was sent to the O.P-2 to issue admit card and registration number and the O.P-1 has not retained any money with her. One Rati Babu was sent to Cuttack with the Complainant to inquire regarding the non issuance of registration number and all the expenses in this regard was borne by the O.P-1.The Complainant himself has neglected in submitting the original documents in time even after several requests hence the O.P-1 cannot be held responsible for the latches of the Complainant. The O.P-1 has never kept the documents with her for one and half year and there was no purpose to retain the same. She has not prepared any documents to escape from the allegation made by the complainant. There was no any contact between the Complainant and the O.P-1 and the Complainant is not a consumer as per the C.P act. The O.P-1 is not deficient in providing services to the Complainant.
As per the O.P-2 the Candidates are to be submitted all relevant documents with the Principal i.e the O.P-1 after taking admission in to the College. The documents afterwards to be submitted with the O.P-2 for verification and allotment of provisional registration number. Several opportunities has given to the O.P-1 for verification of documents of the bonafide trainees but the O.P-1 failed to submit the original documents of the Complainant with the O.P-2 for which the registration number was not issued. The complainant was not a registered trainees under SCTE & VT in electrical trade of the Institute during the year 2010-2012 hence the admit card was not issued. Again he denies to have received any dues/fees from the Complainant though it was paid to the O.P-1. Hence he is not deficient in providing service to the Complainant and the petition deserves to be dismissed.
As the case is a “YEAR OLD CASE”, this Commission has rightly decided to dispose the case on merit basis.
POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-
- Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
- Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?
From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has taken admission in the Institute of the O.P on payment which is treated as consideration amount towards service. By the direction of the O.P-1 he has submitted the required original documents with her for two times. As the date of birth was mis-matched the Complainant has get it corrected from the Competent authority and resubmitted the same with the O.P-1 and paid Rs. 3,000/- towards form fill-up with a hope to get the registration number and Admit Card enabling him to appear in the final examination . There is no doubt that there was a cut-off date. The authorities cannot grant registration and Admit Card beyond the cut-off date which is specifically postulated. But where no fault is attributable to a candidate and he is denied admission for arbitrary reasons, should the cut-off date be permitted to operate as a bar to submission of relevant documents to such students particularly when it would result in complete ruining of the professional career of a meritorious candidate, is the question we have to answer. Having recorded that the Complainant is not at fault and he pursued his rights and remedies as expeditiously as possible. We are of the considered view that the cut-off date cannot be used as a technical instrument or tool to deny registration to a meritorious students. The rule of merit stands completely defeated in the facts of the present case. This matter has been well settled in the case of Snehalata Jagati vs Unknown on 20 September, 2013, High Court of Orissa: Cuttack(W.P.(C) NO. 20557 OF 2013). But here it is observed that the O.Ps are skillfully tried to shift their responsibilities to one another, thus paling with the bright career of the Complainant and for this he has lost two valuable educational years of his life which cannot be compensated by any means. As the O.Ps has committed deficiency in service as well as Unfair Trade Practice we order as Under:-
ORDER
That the Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P-1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund expenses of Rs.30,000/- which were incurred by the Complainant during his study at the Institution of the O.Ps. Further the O.P-1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand ) by way of compensation to the Complainant for causing him mental, physical and financial loss and agony and Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) as litigation costs. This amount shall be paid by the OP-1 & 2 to the Complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which the OPs shall pay interest @ 5% per annum on this amount from the date of filing the complaint, i.e., 09.03.2017 till its realisation."
Order pronounced in the open Court today i.e, on 12th day of April 2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.
Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.
I agree,
-Sd/- -Sd/-
MEMBER(W) PRESIDENT
Dictated and Corrected
by me.
-Sd/-
PRESIDENT
