COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Vs. VIKAS SOOD AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEF facts are that Ms. Rama Sinha, who was the opposite party no.5 before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nahan, H.P. (for short, "District Forum") was ex -Chairperson of a College of Engineering being run at Kala Amb named as I.I.T.T. The said opposite party no.5 in August, 2000, advertised in the newspaper regarding introducing Degree Course in Information Technology for 80 students for the session 2000 -2001. It was stated in the prospectus that the college was affiliated with the H.P. University and was also approved by the AICTE (Delhi). It was further alleged that respondents no.1/complainants were sponsored for admission in the college through competition held by Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur in the year 2000, where -after respondent no.1 got admission in the college of engineering at Kala Amb in August 2000 on the basis of merit list prepared and declared by Director Technical Education respondent no.4. Thereafter, respondents no.1 deposited requisite fees with the opposite party no.5. It is further alleged that respondents no.1 attended first semester classes upto September, 2000, but no examinations of the said semester were held. On enquiries, respondents no.1 were told that examination of first and second semester were to be held in April -May, 2001. It is only then, that it transpired that the college of engineering had neither affiliation with the H.P. University nor was recognized by AICTE (Delhi). Being shocked, the students of the college filed a writ petition in the High Court of H.P., wherein State of H.P. was directed to accommodate the students in other engineering colleges in the state or elsewhere and respondent no.4/opposite party no.3 Director, Technical Education was appointed as Administrator of the Institute. It was thereafter that respondent no.4 and petitioner got respondent no.1 admitted in February, 2002, in the first semester of I.T. Course in Seth Jai Parkash Mukund Lal Institute of Engineering & Technology Radaur Yamuna Nagar of Kurukeshtra University, Haryana, which is at a distance of about 100 kms. from the residence of respondent no.1. Thus, 25 complaints alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices claiming a sum of Rs.4,60,000/ - each along with interest, damages and cost of litigation were filed before the District Forum.

(2.) RESPONDENT no.3/opposite party no.2 - H.P. University filed reply and took specific defence that the college run by opposite party no.5 was neither affiliated nor granted affiliation to start I.T. Course, either by it or by the AICTE (Delhi).

(3.) RESPONDENTS nos.2 and 4/opposite party nos.1 and 3 filed joint reply and took preliminary objection that the complaints are not maintainable. District Forum has no jurisdiction and respondents no.1 are estopped from filing the complaints as no notice under section 80 CPC has been served. On merits, it has been stated that counselling for Information Technology seats against approved seats was done by respondent no.4 pursuant to the directions passed by the Delhi High Court. The students were admitted to the course after due publication of the counselling date and it was made clear that admission to the I.T. Course were subject to the decision of the Delhi High Court and approval of the All India Council for Technical Education. It has been further submitted that after taking over of the College by the Administrator pursuant to the directions of the High Court, vide its order dated 7.9.2001, the answering respondent had got respondent no.1 admitted to Kurukeshtra University. On these grounds, the dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.