SUKHDEEP SINGH Vs. PUNJAB TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/ - charged from the petitioner as admission fees since the admission of the petitioner has been cancelled by the respondents. The relief of compensating the petitioner for mental and physical harassment has also been prayed for.

(2.) THE petitioner's case is that he got admission in the Course of Bachelor of Technology Electronic and Communication Engineering in the academic session 2011 -12 with the respondent no. 2 -college on the basis of counseling held by respondent no. 1. The certificates and other documents submitted by the petitioner were scrutinized and after satisfying itself, the petitioner was admitted in the said course. A sum of Rs.10,000/ - was deposited on 05.10.2011 and Rs.31,555/ - on 28.11.2011 alongwith all required documents. In December, 2011, the petitioner appeared for the first semester examination and having passed the same, was admitted to the second semester. An educational loan was also taken from the Punjab National Bank, Branch Office Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and tuition fee of Rs.8,445/ - was deposited for the second semester. Thus, a total amount of Rs.50,000/ - had been deposited. The petitioner had approached respondent no. 2 -college with a demand draft of Rs.34,750/ - as fees for the second semester examination and was refused the admit card and legal notice dated 15.05.2012 was sent. The petitioner was informed vide reply dated 21.06.2012 that he had been issued the 10+2 qualifying certificate by the Council for Secondary Education, Mohali, which was not recognized by the respondent -university. Reference was also made to notice dated 03.04.2012 issued by respondent no. 2 -college to the respondent no. 1. The petitioner had approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hoshiarpur and the complaint was dismissed on 22.08.2012 on the ground that the Consumer Forum did not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court. Accordingly, the present writ petition was filed alleging that apart from loss of an academic year, the petitioner was entitled for the refund.

(3.) RESPONDENT no. 2 -college, in its written statement, took the plea that admission was allowed by mistake and the petitioner was allowed to appear in the first semester examination. The respondent No.1 had informed respondent no. 2 on 03.04.2012 that the petitioner should not be allowed to appear in the second semester examination since the certificate was not from a recognized institution. Reliance was also placed upon the clause in the admission form to the same effect that in case of cancellation of the admission and wrong declaration, the candidate would have no claim whatsoever on the seat or the dues paid to the institution. The filing of the complaint before the District Consumer Forum was admitted.