IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution: 30.05.2014 Date of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date of Decision: 28.10.2025 FIRST APPEAL NO. 561/2014 IN THE MATTER OF M/S. AMAR JYOTI CHARITABLE TRUST, CENTRE FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION TRAINING, KARKARDOOMA, VIKAS MARG, DELHI–110092.

(Through: Ms. Sayantani Basak, Advocate)

…Appellant VERSUS

1. MR. ROHIT, 2. MS. POOJA, R/O. VILLAGE & POST OFFICE, SAROLI, GHAZIABAD 201102, UP.

…Respondents CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Present: Ms. Sayantani Basak, Counsel for the Appellant.

None for the Respondents.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, (PRESIDENT)

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Commission record are as under:

“This complaint has been filed with the allegations that the complaints are student of 1^st year and studying in First Semester of D.S.E.M.R (Diploma Course) being run by OP. At the time of admission annual charges for library, resource room, teaching- learning material and local exposure visits were mentioned Rs. 11,000/- per year. When he went to take the admission, it was told that this amount has been increased to Rs. 35,000/- per year. The complainant is a poor person and it is very difficult for him to arrange such a huge amount. Any how, they managed to arrange Rs.35,000/- each and took the admission in the course mentioned above. In the prospectus supplied by the OP that the medium of instruction disclosed English and Hindi / State language. The complainant opted for the Hindi medium. The classes of the course begin on 12.07.2012, but no teaching learning material was ever supplied and they were asked to purchase the study material from the market when the OP have already taken the fee from the students. The students were forced to incur the expenses on the purchase of the material. No arrangement for local exposure visits and training programme was made by the institution despite they have taken the fee for the same. They were threatened if they will raise any objection, they will face the consequences. The complainant and the other students were issued tickets for Diwali Fest worth Rs.250/- each for selling on behalf of the trust. They were told to pay Rs.250/- for the tickets. All these factors forced the complainant to withdraw his admission vide letter dated 25.10.2012. He demanded the refund of Rs. 35,000/-. The Hon'ble State Commission, Delhi in the matter NIFT v/s Shikha Goel decided on 12.09.2007 have ruled it to unfair trade practice. It is under these circumstances the complainant has prayed for refund of Rs 71,000/- , compensation of Rs. 2 lac for mental pain and agony as well as cost of litigation of Rs.50,000/-.

In the written statement filed on behalf of the OP, it has been alleged that the centre is for the rehabilitation of the persons and to increase their learning potential through psychosocial interventions. The duration of the course was for 220 days. The security deposit and other charges includes Registration Fee of Rs.500/-, Annual Charges of Rs.35,000/- and this was the condition that once a candidate is admitted will not be allowed to leave under any circumstances and the user's charges will not be refunded in any case. The centre is still ready to impart education to the complainant if he so chooses to continue. The fee structure has been re-scheduled every year. In the year 2008-11 it was Rs.11,000/-, it was increased to Rs.15,000/- in the years 2009-11, Rs.18,000/- in the years 2010-12, Rs.21,000/- in the years 2011-13, and Rs. 35,000/- in the years 2012-14. It is admitted that this amount was towards the annual charges of library, resource room, teaching- learning material and local exposure visits etc. The fee was increased as per the rules and guidelines of Rehabilitation Council of India through circular dated 02.03.2012. The students are taken for exposure through bus of the centre in and around Delhi and NCR. The required study materia