MANSI SHARMA Vs. VOKKALIGARA SANGHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned writ petition is filed by a medical student seeking mandamus against respondent No.1-Institution to refund the sum of Rs.15,60,000.00 along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and also damages for having caused mental agony and harassment to the petitioner.

(2.) The facts leading to the case are as under: The petitioner appeared for NEET examination for the year 2016-17 and secured 103023 ranking. The petitioner had applied for Medical and Dental Counseling vide application No.MED-1029038 for the year 2016-17. The respondent No.2 issued a counseling merit card on 6/9/2016 and on 9/9/2016, the petitioner herein paid a sum of Rs.5,75,000.00 to respondent No.2 by way of Demand Draft. The petitioner further paid a sum of Rs.3,90,000.00 on 21/9/2016 which was also by way of Demand Draft. The petitioner was allotted a confirmed seat for Dental course in the respondent No.1-Institution under COMEDK UGET-2016. The Counseling committee had obtained all original documents. The petitioner had also applied for UPCPMT counseling which was held on 23/9/2016 and therefore, the petitioner approached respondent No.1- Institution with a request to return the originals to enable her to participate in UPCPMT at Uttar Pradesh. The respondent No.1 returned the original documents after securing deposit of fee for three years. The petitioner alleges that she was compelled to deposit three years tuition fees as she was intending to participate for counseling at Uttar Pradesh which was scheduled to be conducted on 23/9/2016. The captioned writ petition is filed alleging that inspite of several representations and e-mails addressed to respondent No.1 requesting to return the tuition fee to the tune of Rs.15,60,000.00, there is inaction on the part of respondent No.1 in not acting upon the representation submitted by the petitioner requesting for refund.

(3.) The respondent No.1-Institution has filed statement of objections on 25/3/2022 and stoutly denied the contentions urged in the writ petition. Referring to the representation submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-C, the respondent No.1 has taken a contention that petitioner while securing originals has voluntarily given an undertaking that she would deposit entire fees of Rs.11,70,000.00 and this undertaking is unequivocal and therefore, it is contended that petitioner is bound by the undertaking given vide Annexure-C and therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable. A specific contention is raised that it is well within the rights of respondent No.1-Institution to demand fee if students leave the college after admission. On these set of defences, respondent No.1-Insitution has sought for dismissal of the writ petition.