KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY vs Pankaj Prasher

THIS appeal has been directed by opposite party No.1 against order dated 26.3.2001 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum), vide which complaint of respondent Pankaj Prasher was accepted with costs of Rs. 500 and appellant as well as Director, Certificate Course in Physical Education opposite party No. 2 were directed to refund an amount of Rs. 13,578 charged from the respondent (complainant) at the time of giving admission along with interest @ 12% p.a. to be calculated from the date of cancellation of admission i.e. after 31.12.96 till payment.

BRIEFLY stated the facts are that Pankaj Prasher respondent (complainant) had applied for C.P.Ed. course for session 1996-97 as per advertisement in Newspaper Tribune dated 26.10.1996 by Kurukshetra University and deposited all the dues including of N.R.I. quota fee i.e. Rs. 1,078 and Rs. 12,500 through bank drafts in the name of Registrar, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra on 20.12.96 for the period June 1996 to 1997. He was allotted roll number 108. However, he was kept under suspension on the recommendation of Proctorial Committee in the meeting held on 15.3.1996 and was ordered not to enter in the university campus vide letter dated 18.3.96. It was next averred that in view of the aforesaid order, provisional admission granted to him in C.P.Ed. course for 1996-97 vide roll No. 108 was cancelled vide letter dated 31.12.96 without giving any opportunity of hearing him which was against rules of the university. Cancellation of admission was wrong and illegal and against principle of natural justice. He made repeated representations through his mother but of no use and even applied for refund of Rs. 13,578 but the amount was not refunded.

Alleging deficiency in service, the complaint was filed.

APPELLANT and opposite party No. 2 contested the complaint. They, however, admitted that respondent (complainant) applied for admission in C.P.Ed. course and he was allowed admission and he deposited the requisite fee. However, in the admission form he did not disclose that he had been suspended and his entry had been banned and thus, he played fraud upon the university and accordingly his admission which was provisionally done on 19.12.96 was cancelled on 31.12.96 and he was informed about the cancellation of admission. They next stated that fee deposited by him could not be refunded in view of the fraud played by the respondent. They denied other allegations and stated that complaint should be dismissed. Parties adduced their evidence by way of affidavits.

AFTER hearing Counsel for the parties, District Consumer Forum accepted the complaint with costs of Rs. 500 as stated in the earlier part of the judgment. Aggrieved by the said order, opposite party No.1 has filed the present appeal. We have heard Counsel for appellant Mr. S.S. Garg, Counsel for respondent Mr. Y.K. Sharma and carefully gone through the file.

IT is an admitted fact that respondent had taken admission in C.P.Ed. course for the session 1996-97 and had deposited all dues including of NRI quota i.e. Rs. 1,078 and Rs. 12,500 through bank drafts on 20.12.1996. He was allotted roll No.108. Later on it was found that his name was kept under suspension on the recommendation of the Proctorial Committee in the meeting held on 15.3.1996 and further his entry in the university campus was banned vide letter dated 18.3.1996. Therefore, when this fact came to the notice of Kurukshetra University, then his admission vide letter dated 31.12.96 was cancelled and consequently roll number 108 allotted to him was also cancelled.

NOW first question to be seen is whether respondent was bound to disclose in the application form the factum of his suspension and banned entry and since he had not disclosed so, his admission was liable to be cancelled. Counsel for appellant contended that according to column-8 of the prospectus, respondent was bound to disclose that he had been suspended and his entry had been banned but he played fraud and did not disclose this factum in the application form for admission and according to the provision of prospectus, his provisional admission which was done on 19.12.1996 was cancelled vide letter dated 31.12.1996. We have gone through copy of the admission form which was filled by the respondent and has been placed on file. Column No. 8 of the said form reads as under : "Give particulars of expulsion or disqualification, if any, for misconduct, etc. for the use of unfair means in any examination : Class . Year........... Roll No........... Name of the university/institution........... Action taken................."

Therefore, the candidate according to this column was bound to give information if there was expulsion or disqualification for misconduct, etc. for use of unfair means in any examination. It is not the case that respondent had used unfair means in the examination and for this purpose, he was expelled or disqualified and this amounted to misconduct. But on the other hand, it is alleged that his entry was banned as he was source of nuisance and further he was suspended from the university. Therefore, he had not supplied any wrong information as per column of the form for taking admission or he had not omitted to give any information which was required to give according to this form. In such circumstances his admission was wrongly cancelled. Otherwise also no notice was given to him before cancellation of his admission and he was condemned unheard. Since, his admission was cancelled suo motu, so, appellant has no right to retain the amount taken on account of admission etc. Thus, order has been rightly made by the District Consumer Forum for refund of Rs. 13,578 which was taken by the university at the time of admission from the respondent alongwith interest @ 12%.

WE concur with the reasoning given by the District Consumer Forum and hold that there is no force in the appeal. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. Copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. Appeal dismissed.