JAIN T.T. COLLEGE vs BHAGWAN SAHAI GUPTA

APPELLANT''s prayer, for adjournment rejected. Hence heard the parties. The case of the respondent complainant was that along with other persons he had appeared at the PTET examination conducted by the Ajmer University in the year 1992 with option for admission at Jaipur Institution as well as appellant''s institution at Alwar. The respondent complainant passed the above examination and got admission at appellant''s institution at Alwar with the understanding that in case he was transferred to Jaipur Institution the fees paid by him to the appellant institution at Alwar, would be adjusted against his liability to the institution at Jaipur. The appellant had accordingly deposited a sum of Rs. 1,475/- towards admission fee, Rs. 250/- towards caution money and Rs. 300/- towards educational tours. The respondent complainant stood transferred to Pareek College at Jaipur and, therefore, demanded the refund of the aforesaid amounts from the appellant, Alwar. The appellant though refunded the amount of Rs. 1,475/- to other students like the respondent complainant, seeking their transfers to other institution but did not refund the aforesaid amount to him on the ground that it was respondent complainant himself, who had sought his transfer from Alwar to Pareek Collage at Jaipur. The D.F. did not endorse such approach adopted by the appellant institution in the matter of the complainant and directed it to refund the aforesaid amounts of Rs. 1,475, Rs. 250/-, Rs. 300/- as detailed above with cost at Rs. 100/- to the respondent. Aggrieved by such order of the D.F. the appellant has preferred this appeal.

THE representative of the appellant has invited our attention to the undertaking given by the respondent to the institution at the time of reallocation of the institution to him and submitted that since the respondent had himself sought his transfer form Alwar to Jaipur, the amount in question was not refundable to him. We, however, find that at the time of seeking admission by the respondent to his institution the appellant had represented that the caution money of Rs. 250/- would be refundable and that similarly the educational camp fee Rs. 300/- would also be refunded to the student in case such camp is not organised by the institution. Insofar as both these amounts are concerned they were refundable to the respondent by the appellant institution in terms of the original contract entered into between the parties. Insofar as respondent''s claim for refund of Rs. 1,475/- was concerned, it was not denied before us that the appellant had refunded so much amounts to other students who sought their transfer from their institution at Alwar to some other institution. Persons placed similarly should be dealt with similarly. In this behalf the case of the respondent for refund of Rs. 1,475/- cannot be allowed to be defeated merely on the ground that he had sought his transfer from the institution at Alwar to another institution at Jaipur. Th undertaking given by the respondent, under the circumstances which compelled him to leave Alwar and go to Jaipur, does not to go amend/modify the original contract between the parties in any way. The original contract between the parties was to refund refundable amounts, to the students, in case they were transferred to other institution of the same university. Since the respondent had sought transfer in terms of such condition between the parties, his right cannot be allowed to be defeated by his subsequently giving an undertaking to the appellant. This is particularly so when we see that other students similarly situated, were treated by the appellant differently.

In view of the above discussion, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss this appeal with cost at Rs. 250/- to the respondent. Appeal dismissed with costs.