Sri Bharat Naik filed a consumer case on 29 Dec 2016 against The Principal, Maa Majhighariani Industrial Training Centre in the Rayagada Consumer Court. The case no is CC/15/127 and the judgment uploaded on 29 Dec 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,
STATE: ODISHA.
C.C. Case No.127 / 2015
P R E S E N T .
Sri Pradeep Dash, President.
Sri Gadadhara Sahu, Member.
Sri Bharat Naik, S/o: Kuma Chandra Naik, aged about 18 years, Resident of Kaliapada, Po: Kolnara, Ps: Chandili, Dist: Rayagada. …. Complainant.
Versus.
… Opposite parties.
For the Complainant:-Self..
For the O.P 1. :- Set exparte.
For the Op 2. :- Self
.
JUDGMENT
The facts of the complaint in brief is that the complainant after his matric examination has intended to join in the institute of O.p 1 for the trade electrician for the Session 2012-2014 and submitted all his documents which was duly acknowledged by the Op N.1. on 28.07.2010 and paid all the fees prescribed by the Op No.1 but to his utter surprise his name was not registered with the Op No2 for the purpose of examination to be completed during the said session. When the complainant asked the reason the Op. 1 stated that by mistake his registration was not held during the said session and extended the period for another one year for which the complainant suffered mental agony and he could not appear the examination in time. The Op 2 also not allowed the complainant to appear the said examination due fault of the Op.1 Hence, prayed to direct the Op.1 and 2 to allow the complainant sit in the examination without paying any extra fees and award monetary compensation and cost of litigation and such other relief as the forum deems fit and proper. Hence, this complaint
2
Being noticed the Op 2 appeared and files counter but Op 1 neither appeared nor filed any written version as such the Op 1 was set exparte. It is submitted by the Op 2. That the name of the complainant was not been registered in SCTE & VT, Odisha during 2012 and the name of the complainant has not been uploaded in online mode during 2012 for admission in Electrical Trade by the Op 1. Therefore are registration number was not allotted to the candidate and in this regard several correspondence was made with Op No1 to furnish detailed report on the matter but O.P 1 remained silent in the matter till date. In view of the above, the complainant is not a registered trainee against the NCVT affiliated trade of Op1 and as such the complainant is not eligible to appear All India Trade Test conducted by DGT. Government of India Hence, the petition filed by the complainant for allowing to appear the AITT examination by Op.2 has no merit for consideration and liable for rejection.
We perused the complaint petition and written version filed by the Op2 it is the case of the complainant that he has taken admission for the trade electrician and submitted all his original certificates to complete the course during the academic session of 2012 -14 and he has paid all the fees prescribed by the OP 1 but the Op 1 has not sent it to the Op 2 for which registration number was not allotted by the Op 2 to the complainant as such the complainant could not appear in the All India Trade Test conducted by DGT, Government of India.
After hearing from the complainant and on perusal of the written version of Op 2 it is very much clear that due to non-submission of registration proposal by the Op 1 the registration number could not be allotted by the OP 2 and as such the name of complainant could not be registered by the Op.2 as a registered trainee against the NCVT affiliated trade of OP 1 and as such the complainant is not eligible to appear the All India Trade Test conducted by DGT, Government of India. Since the Op 1 was remained absent and he was set exparte, the Fourm remain in dark reason of non-submission of registration proposal by the Op 1 it specifically mentioned by the Op 2 that after receipt of notice from this forum, the Op 2 has mad several correspondence to furnish detailed report on the matter but the Op.2 that after receipt of notice from this forum, the Op.2 has made several correspondence to furnish detailed report on the matter but the Op.1 remained silent over the matter. Hence, in view of the above submission of the Op.2 it was very much clear that due to negligence and careless attitude of the Op.1 the complainant could not appear in the said examination which is clear a deficiency in service on the part of the O.p 1 and for the latches of the Op.1 he has to pay monetary compensation to the complainant. Hence, it is ordered.
ORDER.
Since the complainant was suffered and his academic career was loss due to the negligence of the Op No.1 we feel it proper to direct the Op. No.1 to pay Rs.1,000/- per month for the entire period of loss which litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- and the above awarded amount is to be paid by the Op No.1 within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the Op.No1 is liable to pay 12% interest per annum on the above awarded amount till its realization. We do not pass any order against the Op.2
Pronounced in open forum today on this 29th day of December, 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.
Dictated and corrected by me
Pronounced on this 14th. day of December , 2017.
Member. PRESIDENT.
Documents filed by the parties:
By the complainant:
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.