REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6807 of 2008

MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY

…. Appellant

VERSUS

SURJEET KAUR

….

Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.

1.

The Maharshi Dayanand University (hereinafter referred

to as “the appellant”) has questioned the correctness of the

order in Revision Petition No.132/06 passed by the National

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi

(hereinafter called “National Commission”) dated 27.4.2007

whereby the National Commission

has allowed the Revision

Petition and the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as “State

Commission”) has been set aside simultaneously restoring the

order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal

Forum, Gurgaon (hereinafter called as “District Forum”). A

further direction has been issued to the appellant to issue the

B.Ed. Degree to the respondent on the basis of the results of

her examinations which were held in December, 1998.

2.

The dispute arose when the respondent felt aggrieved by

the action of the appellant refusing to confer the degree of

B.Ed. on her. The background of the facts giving rise to the

case was that the respondent took admission in the academic

session of 1994-95 as a regular student to pursue the course

of M.A. in Political Science from Government College, Gurgaon.

The respondent appeared in the Part-II Examination in May,

1995 as a regular candidate and in the same academic session

of 1994-95 she also applied for admission in the B.Ed.

(correspondence course) without disclosing the fact that she

was already pursuing the regular course of M.A. in Political

Science. The University at the time of preparation of the

results of M.A. in Political Science discovered that the

respondent had been pursuing her B.Ed. course in violation of

Clause 17(b) of the General Rules of Examination and

2

accordingly the respondent was informed that in view of the

aforesaid rules she should exercise her option to choose

anyone of the courses.

3.

The respondent voluntarily and consciously opted for

pursuing her course of M.A. in Political Science and forewent

her B.Ed. Degree course.

4.

Subsequently, the University as a general measure of

benefit granted an indulgence through Notification dated

16.3.1998 giving a further chance to such Ex. students who

had not been able to complete their post-graduation/B.Ed.

courses within the span of prescribed period as provided for

under the rules. The supplementary examinations in this

regard were announced by the University in the month of

December, 1998.

5.

The respondent applied under the said Notification for

appearing in B.Ed. examination and succeeded in appearing in

the examinations and also passed the same. The Appellant-

University refused to confer the degree of B.Ed. on the

3

respondent. Aggrieved, the respondent approached the

District Forum in the year 2000 praying for the relief which

has now been ultimately awarded in the impugned order of

National Commission. The District Forum passed an order in

favour of the respondent vide judgment and order dated

24.9.2004 and directed the appellant to issue the B.Ed. degree

and also award Rs.1,000/- as compensation to the

respondent. This order was passed by the District Forum

despite a specific objection taken by the appellant that the

District Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain such a

complaint and award any such relief.

6.

Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the State

Commission and the same was allowed vide judgment dated

19.10.2005. The judgment of the District Forum was set aside

holding that the District Forum should not have entertained

the complaint. The respondent aggrieved by the order of the

State Comm