State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Saravjeet Singh vs State Of Haryana on 4 August, 2010
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.838 of 2010 Date of Institution:09.06.2010 Date of Decision:04.08.2010 Saravjeet Singh s/o Sh. Ram Singh, r/o Village Malikpura, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa. Appellant Versus. 1. State of Haryana through Collector Sirsa. 2. Director, Higher Secondary Education, Haryana, Chandigarh. 3. District Education Officer, Sirsa. 4. Sub Divisional Education Officer, Dabwali, District Sirsa. 5. Som Parkash Head master, Govt. High School, Malikpura, Tehsil Dabwali, District Sirsa. .Respondents Present:- None for the appellant. BEFORE: Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President. Dr. Rekha Sharma, Member. Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member O R D E R
JUSTICE, R.S. MADAN, PRESIDENT:-
The case set up by the complainant before the District Forum was that in the matriculation examination he had obtained more than 80.4% marks and for that reason he had applied with the Head Master of his school to send his case for the scholarship as per the scheme of the Government of Haryana vide which students who have obtained more than 80% marks in the matriculation examination, are entitled to the scholarship. However, the headmaster of the school has delayed the mater and for that reason he was deprived of his right of scholarship.
The plea of the opposite party was that the principal of the school has recommended the case of the complainant vide letter dated 19.2.2007, but the cut off list of the scholarship was closed at serial No.905 and percentage of 87.8%, however, the name of the complainant was at Sr. No.6709, hence, he was not entitled to the scholarship and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and complaint merited dismissal.
Both the parties adduced evidence in support of their respective stands taken before the District Forum.
While disposing of the complaint, the District Forum has taken into consideration the fact that as per the letter No.9/11-07 SCho.(6) dated 10.1.2008 issued by the opposite party No.2, the complainant was not entitled to the scholarship who had obtained the 80.4% marks in the matriculation, because the cut off list for scholarship was closed at 87.8%. In this view of the matter, finding no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the District Forum has dismissed the complaint Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, appellant/complainant has filed the present appeal before this Commission.
We have gone though the impugned order and taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and are of the view that since the merit list for scholarship was closed at 87.8% marks, whereas the complainant was having only 80.4% marks, therefore, he was not entitled for the scholarship and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. In this view of the matter, we feel that District Forum was justified in dismissing the complaint vide its impugned order, which does not call for any interference in this appeal.
No merit. Dismissed in limini.
4th August, 2010 Justice R.S. Madan.
President.
Dr. Rekha Sharma, Member Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member