BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM:: AT KHAMMAM Dated this, the 21st day of August, 2009 Coram: 1. Sri.Vijay Kumar, B.Com., LL.B., President 2. Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha, B.Sc., B.L., Member C.C.No.24/2009 Between: Silusani Tejasri, D/o.Satyanarayana, age: 20 years, occu: Engineering student, r/o.H.No.4-3-64, Subhash Chandra Bose Centre, Khammam. …Complainant and The Secretary and Correspondent, Bomma Institute of Technology and Sciences behind Eenadu office, Allipuram, Khammam urban mandal, Khammam District. …Opposite party. This C.C. came before us for final hearing on 13-8-2009 in the presence of Sri.R.Narasimha Rao, Advocate for complainant; Sri.H.Sree Rama Rao, Advocate for opposite party; upon hearing the arguments and upon perusing the material papers on record, having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following order: O R D E R (per Sri. Vijay Kumar, President) 1. This complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is a student, studying Engineering II year at Vijaya Engineering College, Tanikella village of Khammam District. The complainant had appeared for EMCET examination for the year 2007 held by the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, she came to know that there were vacancies in Computer Science Engineering under management quota at opposite party’s college. On 23-7-2007 the complainant approached the opposite party and enquired about the fee structure. Accordingly, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.30,000/- for reserving the seat and as well as part payment of tuition fee for I year C.S.E., as demanded by the opposite party and obtained a receipt vide receipt No.1393,dt.23-7-2007, but the opposite party did not give any admission to her and also informed that if she get seat in C.S.E. in another college, it shall refund the deposited amount after deducting Rs.1,000/- as per the norms and conditions of AICTE. Subsequently, the complainant got admission in Vijaya Engineering college, Tanikella in C.S.E. for the academic year 2007-2008. The complainant approached the opposite party and requested to refund the college fee, which is paid by her, but the opposite party did not show interest to refund the amount by postponing the matter under one pretext or the other. Finally on 4-3-2009, the complainant got issued a legal notice to the opposite party. After receipt of notice also, the opposite party did not choose either to refund the amount or to give any reply. It is further submitted that during the academic year 2007-08, no seats in computer science branch are unfilled. Hence, this complaint. 2. On receipt of notice, the opposite party appeared through its counsel, filed counter and denied all the averments made in the complaint. It is further contended that the opposite party does not know whether the complainant got seat in Vijaya Engineering college and the complainant approached the opposite party and requested to refund the amount. In fact the complainant never approached the opposite party after paying the part of the tution fee on 23-7-2007 and this opposite party kept vacant a seat to the complainant due to which it sustained loss in receiving the remaining tuition fee for the said seat and there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and prayed to dismiss the complaint. 3. On behalf of the complainant, the following documents have been filed and marked as Exs.A.1 to A.5. Ex.A.1 - Original receipt issued by opposite party in favour of complainant for Rs.30,000/- vide receipt No.1393, dt.23-7-2007 Ex.A.2 - Public notice issued by AICTE Ex.A.3 - Office copy of legal notice, dt.4-3-2009 Ex.A.4 - Courier receipt, dt.4-3-2009 Ex.A.5 - Courier acknowledgment, dt.5-3-2009 On behalf of the opposite party, no documents filed. 4. The complainant filed written arguments, reiterating the contents of the complaint. Since there is no representation from opposite party, the matter is treated as heard and reserved for orders. Upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing the arguments of complainant, the points that arose for consideration are, 1) Whether the complainant is entitled to ask for the refund of the amount paid by her towards admission in C.S.E. branch in Bomma Institute of Technology and Science? 2) To what relief? Point No.1: 5. The case of the complainant is that on 23-7-2007 she approached the opposite party and enquired about the fee structure for seeking admission. As per the admission of opposite party, she paid an amount of Rs.30,000/- for reserving her seat as well as part payment of tuition fee of first year. The opposite party issued a receipt as in Ex.A.1. The opposite party promised to refund the deposited amount of Rs.30,000/-, in case the complainant gets admission in any other college by deducting Rs.1,000/- towards processing fee. On this aspect the complainant refers to public notice, which is marked as Ex.A.2, wherein the instructions have been given to all the technical institutions, universities including deemed to be universities imparting technical education regarding matters concerning charging of fees, refund of fees and other student related issues. In the said instructions, it is clearly mentioned that in the event of student withdrawing before the starting of the course, the wait listed candidates should be given admission against the vacant seat. The entire fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not more than Rs.1,000/- shall be refunded and returned by the institution to the student withdrawing from the programme. It would not be permissible for institutions to retain the institution leaving certificates in original, the fee collected from the students must return with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and proportionate hostel rent. As per the instructions issued by the Member Secretary, it is the duty of opposite party to refund the deposited amount of Rs.30,000/- after deducting Rs.1,000/- towards processing fee. In the instant case, even after receipt of legal notice, dt.5-3-2009, which is marked as Ex.A.1, the opposite party did not choose either to reply the legal notice or to refund the amount. This act on the part of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. 6. In view of afore said reasons, the complaint is fit to be allowed. Point No.2: 7. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite party to refund an amount of Rs.30,000/- - Rs.1,000/- towards processing fee, which comes to Rs.29,000/- to the complainant. The opposite party further directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,00/- towards costs of the litigation. There is no order as to the claim of compensation. Dictated to the steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum on 21st day of August, 2009. PRESIDENT MEMEBR DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM KHAMMAM Witnesses examined for complainant: -Nil- Witnesses examined for opposite party: -Nil- Exhibits marked for complainant: Ex.A.1 - Original receipt issued by opposite party in favour of complainant for Rs.30,000/- vide receipt No.1393, dt.23-7-2007 Ex.A.2 - Public notice issued by AICTE Ex.A.3 - Office copy of legal notice, dt.4-3-2009 Ex.A.4 - Courier receipt, dt.4-3-2009 Ex.A.5 - Courier acknowledgment, dt.5-3-2009 Exhibits marked for opposite party: -Nil- PRESIDENT MEMEBR DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM KHAMMAM | 
