BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISISON,
KURUKSHETRA
Complaint No. 277 of 2020 Date of institution: 21.08.2020 Date of decision: 21.10.2024
Randhir Singh son of Shri Desh Raj, resident of Village Munda Khera, Post Office Jyotisar, District Kuruskhetra- Mobile No. 9416173443.
…Complainant.
Versus
Amatir Kanya Gurukul District Kuruskhera, village Bachgaon Gamri, Lukhi Road, Kurukshetra through its President Managing Committee.
1.
The Manager, Amatir Kanya, Gurukul District Kuruskhera, village Bachgaon Gamri, Lukhi Road, Kurukshetra.
2.
…Opposite parties.
•
NEELAM, MEMBER.
RAMESH KUMAR, MEMBER.
■
Shri Mohit Goel, Advocate for the OPs.
: • This is a complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
2. It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant's daughter named Suhani Rana was studying in the class 10thB with Roll No. 28, in Amatir Kanya Gurukul which is running under the management of both opposite parties. It is further averred that the complainant's daughter Suhani Rana appeared in the 10thclass board exams with Roll No. 17179993 in the session of 2019-20 and she declared pass by result published on 15.07.2020. It is further averred that the complainant and his daughter made their mind to pursue education out of opposite party's school in stream of their choice and for this purpose, they were in need of School
1
Leaving Certificate and accordingly, he reached to the school on 15.07.2020, for obtaining the same as well as refund of security fees. He has met there with Shri Vishnu Accountant who is still working in the school and requested for guidance regarding issuance of the as well as School Leaving Certificate as well as refund of the security fees. Shri Vishnu consulted Ms.Rashmi madam over the phone and thereafter asked to him to contact with her in the evening regarding School Leaving Certificate as well as refund of the security fees.
3. It is further averred that the complainant and his family member contacted with Ms.Rashmi madam in evening over the mobile phone and she stated to him that he has to pay Rs. 15,600/- as tuition fees for online classes for 4 months, and against this demand, he protested as it was arbitrary and unlawful in the eyes of law, since he and his daughter never filled any registration form or consented for paying tuition fees for any stream and even the result was declared on 15.07.2020, so asking of such demand of Rs. 15,600/- is illegal in the eyes of law and he is not bound to pay such tuition fees as no rules/law has been mentioned regarding levy of such fees when he has not opted or consented for studying in the 11thclass in opposite party's school. Hence this present complaint.
4. On notice, opposite parties No. 1 & 2 appeared and filed their written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is submitted that as per latest judgment of National Commission in "Manu Solanki and Others Versus Vinayaka Mission University and Others" it has been upheld that educational institutions will not be covered under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.
5. It is further submitted that Suhani Rana was studying in class 11thin academic session 2020-21 at Amatir Kanya Gurukul. She was student of class of 10thin the previous year i.e. session 2019-20. It is further submitted that the complainant did not visit the school on 15.07.2020 or any other day for issuance of school leaving certificate of Suhani Rana and for refund of security fee, complainant's alleged meeting with the account of OPs Shri Vishnu and his telephonic conversation with teacher Rashmi is figment of imagination, hence the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex. C1 to Ex C5 and closed the evidence on 04.03.2022 by suffering separate statement.
7. Learned counsel for the opposite parties No. 1 & 2 has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R8 and closed the evidence on 29.11.2022 by suffering separate statement.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties at length and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.
9. Sh.Shekhar Thakur, ld. consel for the complainant has argued that the complainant's daughter named Suhani Rana was studying in the class 10thB with Roll No. 28, in Amatir Kanya Gurukul which is running under the management of both opposite parties. It is further argued that the complainant's daughter Suhani Rana appeared in the 10thclass board exams with Roll No. 17179993 in the session of 2019-20 and she declared pass by result published on 15.07.2020. It is further argued that the complainant and his daughter made their mind to pursue education out of opposite party's school in stream of their choice and for this purpose, they were in need of School Leaving Certificate and accordingly, he reached to the school on 15.07.2020, for obtaining the same as well as refund of security fees. He has met there with Shri Vishnu Accountant who is still working in the school and requested for guidance regarding issuance of the as well as School Leaving Certificate as well as refund of the security fees. Shri Vishnu consulted Ms.Rashmi madam over the phone and thereafter asked to him to contact with her in the evening regarding School Leaving Certificate as well as refund of the security fees. Ld. counsel for the complainant further argued that the complainant and his family member contacted with Ms.Rashmi madam in evening over the mobile phone and she stated to him that he has to pay Rs. 15,600/- as tuition fees for online classes for 4 months, and against this demand, he protested as it was arbitrary and unlawful in the eyes of law, since he and his daughter never filled any registration form or consented for paying tuition fees for any stream and even the result was declared on 15.07.2020, so asking of such demand of Rs.15,600/- is illegal in the eyes of law and he is not bound to pay such tuition fees as no rules/law has been mentioned regarding levy of such fees
2
when he has not opted or consented for studying in the 11thclass in opposite party's school.
10. Sh.Mohit Goel, counsel for opposite parties has rebutted the claims of complainant and has argued that the school leaving certificate has been generated for the complainant's daughter from the M.I.S. system of Haryana School Education Department and it is clearly stated that Suhani Rana was studying in class 11thand has paid all the dues to the school and has left the school in midsession to join different school. It implies that paying of all dues to the school is pre-requisite to the eligible for S.L.C. Hence, the complainant is liable to pay the required tuition fee of Rs.14,000/- as due from the period from April-2020 to July-2020 as Suhani Rana had attended the online classes.
11. Sh.Shekhar Thakur, counsel for complainant has argued that Suhani Rana D/o complainant Randhir Singh was studying in Amatir Kanya Gurukul District Kurukshetra. All the normal fees was paid by the complainant in the school, but during the Covid-19 all the school were closed and student could not go to the school to attend the classes. Later on student studied through online classes. Ld. counsel for complainant further argued that Suhani Rana did not consented to take tuition through online classes. An amount of Rs.14,000/- for fees for the quarter in which schools were closed during the Covid/Corona period. Now, the opposite parties are demanding total Rs.14,000/- from the complainant. No School Leaving Certificate was issued to Suhani Ran daughter of Randhir Singh. She had taken admission in another school. Sh.Randhir Singh is a poor person and he cannot afford the higher fees of opposite parties i.e. Amatir Kanya Gurukul. No School Leaving Certificate was issued to Suhani Rana. Hence, he filed the complaint. Due to intervention Provisional School Leaving Certificate was issued to Suhani Rana and she deposited Rs.5,000/- in the court out of Rs.14,000/- for the quarter in tuition Session, while the Amatir Kanya Gurukul remained closed for that quarter due to Covid/Corona.
12. In view of our aforesaid discussion, the present complaint is accepted. We direct the respondents to Issue the original school leaving certificate to Suhani Ranan daughter of complainant Randhir Singh without charging any fees as she has already paid Rs.5,000/- towards the issuance of School Leaving Certificate to the opposite parties. In the eventuality, if this amount of Rs.5,000/- deposited in the court same be refunded to the respondents on the application filed by the complainant in this context. Nothing more remains to be adjudicated.
13. In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Commission:
Dated: 21.10.2024
Dr. Neelima Shangla)
President,
DCDRC, Kurukshetra.
(Neelam) (Ramesh Kumar)
Member Member
3