SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. S MARIMUTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant s case is that his daughter was called for counselling in Anna University for admission under special reservation category on 1.9.1999. But, the opposite party, stating that the reserved seats under this category were over, allotted a payment seat to the complainant s daughter. The complainant s daughter paid a sum of Rs. 1,000/ - towards admission fee at the time of counselling. The complainant came to know that two out of five seats were given to ineligible candidates. The complainant collected sufficient evidence to the fraud committed and he filed a writ petition and after two months, the verdict was rendered in complainant s favour ordering the Secretary and DOTE to give a seat to the complainant s daughter. The complainant having undergone an open -heart surgery, had been put to much mental and physical strain. The complainant, therefore, filed the complaint.

(2.) THE opposite party filed a version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant is not a consumer. There is no locus standi. The opposite party being an educational institution, is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant ought to have obtained all reliefs in the High Court itself. The complaint is barred by the principle of res judicata. The complainant s daughter secured only 165.64 marks out of 300 in the qualifying examination. She applied under special category of special reservation for "Inter -caste marriage". She was placed 37th in the merit list. The opposite party has an updation system. If such updation of applications is not allowed, it would result in injustice to those who secured higher marks. At the time of counselling, in the updation counter one Mr. B. Karthik brought to the notice that he had applied under the special category of special reservation for "inter -caste marriage" and that his name did not find a place in the list of special reservation. It was found out that he failed to shade in the computer coding sheet and, therefore, his name was included in the list. After verification of records, his name was also included in the merit list under special reservation. Similarly one G.M. Akila who had applied under special category of special reservation of inter -caste marriage was also not included in the list. The said Akila and Karthik had secured 225.39 and 193.39 marks respectively in the qualifying examination as compared to the marks of the complainant s daughter. The complainant s daughter filed W.P. No. 15641/99 before the Hon ble High Court and on the ground that the selecting authorities cannot overlook the instructions given to the candidates, the writ petition was allowed. The opposite party has filed a writ appeal and the same is pending before the Hon ble High Court. This issue has not become final. The opposite party is not liable for any bona fide procedural decision taken in the larger interest of students. There is no mala fide on the part of the opposite party. Pursuant to the order of the High Court, the complainant s daughter was offered admission in Alagappa College of Engineering, Karaikudi. The sum of Rs. 1,000/ - was repaid to her. Uncharitable, offensive and derogatory language is used by the complainant which have to be expunged. The opposite party prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

(3.) THE lower Forum allowed the complaint and directed the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - towards compensation and Rs. 500/ - as costs. Hence the present appeal.