STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND DEHRADUN FIRST APPEAL NO. 03 / 2020 College of Engineering Roorkee (COER)

through Administrative Officer, Post Box No. 27 Vardhmanpuram, Haridwar Road, Roorkee …… Appellant / Opposite Party Versus Smt. Zaiba D/o Sh. Mohd. Tehseen W/o Sh. Mohd. Mustakeem R/o Village Mahmoodpur, Kaliyar, District Haridwar At present R/o Mohalla Kila, Manglaur Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar …… Respondent / Complainant Sh. Amit Agarwal, Learned Counsel for the Appellant Sh. Divyansh Rohilla, Learned Counsel for Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.S. Tripathi, President Mr. Udai Singh Tolia, Member-II Dated: 26/09/2022

ORDER

(Per: Justice D.S. Tripathi, President):

This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.07.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar (in short “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 470 of 2015; Smt. Zaiba Vs. College of Engineering Roorkee, by which the consumer complaint was allowed and the appellant – opposite party was directed to pay sum of Rs. 97,000/- to the respondent – complainant along with interest @6% p.a. from 29.09.2015, i.e., the date of institution of the consumer complaint till payment and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses.

2. Facts giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are that according to the consumer complaint, on 03.06.2011, the respondent – complainant had submitted registration form with the appellant – College (opposite party before the District Commission) for admission in M.B.A. (Master of Business Administration) course and deposited Rs. 1,000-/. On 05.07.2011, the complainant deposited the fee amounting to Rs. 97,000/-. However, before commencement of classes for the said course, the complainant got back (could not succeed) in one paper of B.B.A. (Bachelor of Business Administration) final year, on account whereof, she could not study M.B.A. course. Thereafter, the complainant applied with the College for refund of fee, but the same was not refunded by the College. The matter between the parties has earlier gone upto Hon’ble National Commission, which vide order passed in Revision Petition No. 4491 of 2014, has directed the College to sympathetically consider the matter regarding refund of fee, but inspite of repeated requests, no action was taken and the fee was not refunded, which led to filing of consumer complaint by the complainant before the District Commission.

3. The appellant filed written statement before the District Commission, pleading therein that the complainant had attended the classes of M.B.A. course. In the event of back in previous course, the student can take further education and upon clearance of back, can participate in future examination, but in the event of being unsuccessful in the examination, the student is not entitled to further education. The guidelines issued by A.I.C.T.E. (All India Council for Technical Education) are not applicable in the present case, because the complainant discontinued to attend the class in the mid-session, as per own wish, with the result that one seat of M.B.A. course remained vacant, causing financial loss to the College. After decision of Revision Petition No. 4491 of 2014 by Hon’ble National Commission, the matter regarding refund of fee to the complainant was sympathetically considered and it was observed that there is no basis for refunding the fee to the complainant and intimation with regard thereto was duly given to the complainant. The consumer complaint filed by the complainant is barred by limitation and the same is liable to be dismissed.

4. After giving opportunity of hearing to the parties, the consumer complaint has been decided by learned District Commission vide impugned judgment and order dated 29.07.2019, thereby allowing the consumer complaint in the above terms. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the instant app