State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bhartiya College Of Agriculture & ... vs Sagar Sinha on 25 July, 2013
CHHATTISGARH STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PANDRI, RAIPUR (C.G)
Appeal No.FA/12/382
Instituted on : 24.07.2012
Bhartiya College of Agriculture & Agricultural Engineering,
Pulgaon Chowk, Durg
Tahsil & District - Durg (C.G.)
Through : Managing Director,
Sushil Chandrakar. ... Appellant
Vs.
Sagar Sinha, S/o Shri Girish Sinha,
Present address : Pachari Para,
Durg (C.G.)
Permanent Address - Village - Parna,
Tahsil - Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent
Appeal No.FA/12/388
Instituted on : 25.07.2012
Sagar Sinha, S/o Shri Girish Sinha,
Present address : Pachari Para, Ward No.28,
Durg, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.)
Permanent Address - Village - Parna,
Tahsil - Gunderdehi, District Balod (C.G.) ... Appellant
Vs.
Bhartiya College of Agriculture & Agricultural Engineering,
Pulgaon Chowk, Durg
Tahsil & District - Durg (C.G.)
Through : Manager - Sushil Chandrakar. ... Respondent
PRESENT :
HON'BLE SMT. VEENA MISRA, PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI V.K. PATIL, MEMBER
HON'BLE MISS HEENA THAKKAR, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES IN BOTH THE APPEALS :
Shri R.K. Bhawnani, for the Complainant/Sagar Sinha.
Shri R.K. Gomasta, for the O.P./Bhartiya College of Agriculture &
Agricultural Engineering, Durg (C.G.).
// 2 //
ORDER
DATED : 25/07/2013 PER :- HON'BLE SMT. VEENA MISRA, PRESIDING MEMBER This order will govern disposal of Appeal Nos. FA/12/382 and FA/12/388, which have been preferred by the O.P./Institution & the complainant respectively against the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (C.G.) (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), on 25.06.2012 in Complaint Case No.03/2012, whereby the District Forum had partly allowed the complaint filed by the complainant and directed the O.P. / Institution to make payment of Rs.43,000/- together with interest @ 7% p.a. from 21.12.2011 till date of payment and also to pay Rs.1,000/- towards compensation for mental harassment and Rs.1,000/- towards cost. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Appeal No. FA/382/12 has been filed by the O.P. / Institution whereas the other appeal bearing No. FA/12/388 has been filed by the complainant. In this order the parties will be referred to as complainant and O.P. for the sake of clarity and in order to avoid confusion. The original of this order be retained in the file of Appeal No. FA/12/382 and it's copy be placed in the file of Appeal No. FA/12/388.
2 The case of the complainant before the District Forum was that he had taken admission in B. Tech Agriculture First Year as a regular student in the academic session 2010-11 in the O.P./Institution. The // 3 // complainant had paid Rs.200/- towards Counseling Charges and Rs.21,900/- was paid on 16.07.2010 towards fee for the First Semester. Examination for the first semester was held and the complainant appeared in the said examination, but his result with that of two other candidates was not declared. Upon this, he contacted the O.P. / Institution and was told that as caste verification was not done, hence result has been withheld and after caste verification, it would be declared and in case caste verification is not done, his result will be declared as a general category candidate. Upon such assurance given by the O.P. / Institution, the complainant deposited fee of Rs.21,100/- on 28.10.2010 for second semester and started preparing for the course. He appeared in the examination for Second Semester. Upon result not being declared, he again contacted the O.P. and again he was assured that result will be declared as candidate of general category. Thereafter the complainant contacted Head of the Department of the faculty Shri A.K. Verma and as per his advice the complainant went to the Indira Gandhi Agriculture University, where he was told that his name was not even enrolled with the University and as such the result was not declared. Thereafter he again contacted O.P. and the O.P. admitted that they have committed a grave mistake but they refused to refund the fee. It was alleged in the complaint that this act on part of the O.P. amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which resulted in waste of more than one valuable academic year of // 4 // the complainant besides causing him a lot of mental harassment and financial loss. Hence complaint before the District Forum was filed seeking direction for payment of Rs.2,79,000/- claimed under various heads as detailed in the complaint.
3. Resisting the complaint, the O.P./ Institution raised preliminary objection in the written version that Indira Gandhi Agriculture University, Raipur is a necessary party to the proceedings, but the complainant has not impleaded the said University as a party hence the complaint is not maintainable due to non-joinder of necessary party. It was further averred that the due to non-verification of caste, result of the complainant was not declared. Registration and enrollment of students, conduct of examination and declaration of results is done by the University and O.P./Institution cannot be held to be liable for non-declaration of result of the complainant. It was averred in written version that the complainant was never assured by the O.P. that his result will be declared as a general category candidate. Four seats in the O.P./Institution were reserved for OBC quota as per rules of the University. Hence it was obligatory for the candidate admitted against the said seats to provide proper Caste Certificate, but the complainant failed to do so, hence his admission was cancelled by the University. O.P. had pasted notice on the Notice Board on 30.12.2010, 14.02.2011, 15.04.2011 and 25.07.2011 requiring the // 5 // complainant to provide necessary certificate, but the complainant failed to do so. It was further averred that the Agriculture University had also issued various letters for producing the necessary caste verification certificate but the complainant did not provide the same hence his name could not be enrolled with the University. It was averred that the complainant had studied in the O.P./Institution in the academic year 2010-11 and hence there is no question of refund of fee. It was further averred that seats under OBC quota with the O.P. / Institution remained vacant hence O.P./Institution suffered great financial loss. On the other hand, due to OBC quota seats remaining vacant, loss was also caused to those OBC candidates who could not get admission in the O.P./Institution on the seats reserved for OBC candidates. Hence the O.P. claimed Rs.1,25,800/- from the complainant which is fee for six semesters for B. Tech Agriculture course as it has suffered that much loss due to non-furnishing of the caste verification certificate by the complainant.
4. Learned District Forum was not impressed by the defense taken by the O.P. and had allowed the complaint in part giving necessary directions vide the impugned order. Aggrieved by the said order, the O.P. / Institution has filed Appeal No. FA/12/382 whereas the complainant, not being satisfied by the amount awarded by the District Forum has preferred Appeal No. FA/12/388.
// 6 //
5. Learned counsel for the O.P./Institution (appellant in Appeal No. FA/12/382) submitted that the District Forum has committed grave mistake in partly allowing the complaint and also in holding that the Indira Gandhi Agriculture University was not a necessary party to the proceedings. He submitted that it was a necessary party, who could have clarified the points in dispute as rules and regulations regarding admission of the students, conduct of examination, declaration of result and award of degree is controlled by the University hence it was necessary party for proper adjudication of the complaint and in absence its impleadment, the complaint was liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of the necessary party.
6. Counsel for the O.P. / Institution further submitted that admission in the college of the O.P. was through counseling and complainant was admitted under OBC quota as per norms laid by the University. Under the rules, the complainant was required to submit caste verification certificate to the University for confirmation of seat under OBC quota. Since the complainant was admitted under OBC quota, he cannot be treated as a general candidate in case he fails to submit caste verification certificate.
7. Learned counsel for the O.P. further submitted that the District Forum has committed a grave mistake in holding that there was // 7 // deficiency in service on the part of O.P. On the contrary the O.P. had repeatedly asked the complainant to submit caste verification certificate by displaying notice on the notice board of the college and issuing oral instructions to the complainant yet he failed to submit caste verification certificate. Learned counsel emphatically submitted that the work of the institution was only to impart education which was properly done by it and it cannot be held liable for subsequent cancellation of admission by the university. Learned counsel submitted that in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the District Forum is not proper and prayed for setting aside order of the District Forum and allowing the appeal filed by the O.P.
8. Learned counsel for the complainant / (appellant in appeal No. FA/12/388) submitted that though the District Forum has found the O.P. to be deficient in providing service yet proper compensation has not been awarded. The District Forum has only directed the O.P. to refund the amount of fee paid by the complainant but has failed to take into account that the complainant has suffered loss of more than one valuable academic year and has not awarded compensation for this loss. He submitted that besides direction of refund of fee, only a sum of Rs.1,000/- has been awarded towards compensation, which is not proper. Learned counsel further submitted that the District Forum has awarded only interest @ 7% p.a. on the awarded amount from the // 8 // date of complaint whereas the complainant had demanded interest @ 18% p.a. In these circumstance, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the order passed by the District Forum deserves to be modified and the reliefs as prayed in the complaint be granted.
9. During pendency of the appeal, counsel for the O.P. (appellant in Appeal No. FA/12/382) had filed an application for taking documents as per list on record at the appellate stage. The documents appear to be relevant for deciding the dispute between the parties, hence the application is allowed and documents are taken on record.
10. Final arguments heard. Record carefully perused.
11. First plea taken by the O.P. was that Indira Gandhi Agriculture University, Raipur was a necessary party and it's non-impleadment ought to have resulted in dismissal of the complaint. We are not satisfied by the plea taken by the learned counsel for the O.P. because the dispute between the parties relates to taking admission in B. Tech Agriculture course and later on cancellation of their admission. The admission was given by the O.P./Institution hence it was the duty of the said Institution to verify whether actually candidate was entitled to get admission under OBC quota or not. In the documents filed before us we find copy of one letter dated 03.06.2011 addressed to the Registrar of the University and another letter of the same date // 9 // addressed to the Dy. Secretary, Dept. of Agriculture, Government of Chhattisgarh and letter dated 27.06.2011 addressed to the Chancellor, Indira Gandhi Agriculture University in all these letters there is reference to some Supreme Court judgment and it is stated that as per said judgment reservation was not applicable to self-financed private institutions. Taking the aforesaid plea these letters were written so that result of the candidates may be declared so as to avoid cancellation of admission of the students who were already admitted. From these letters it is apparent that the O.P. / Institution had given admission to candidates of general class under wrong impression that policy of reservation would not apply to their institution but subsequently this belief was found not to be true. It appears that as the said student was not from OBC quota, they could not produce caste verification Certificate and consequently their admissions were cancelled. This clearly shows that admission was given to the student by O.P. under wrong impression regarding the policy. In these circumstances, the University cannot be said to be a necessary party.
12. We find that by giving admission to general category candidate against OBC quota seat definitely amounts to deficiency in service for which the complainant had to suffer a lot of mental harassment and financial loss and above all loss of more than one valuable year of his academic life. In these circumstances we find the amount awarded by // 10 // the District Forum to be insufficient. Though the complainant had claimed Rs.2,79,000/- but the said amount appears to be exaggerated. We find compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the amount awarded by the District Forum to be proper compensation in the facts of the case. So far as rate of interest is considered we find the rate awarded by the District Forum to be proper. Hence appeal No. FA/12/388 filed by complainant is partly allowed in aforementioned terms. The other Appeal bearing No. FA/12/382 filed by O.P. / Institution being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed.
(Smt.Veena Misra) (V.K.Patil) (Ms. Heena Thakkar)
Presiding Member Member Member
/07/2013 /07/2013 /07/2013