BOARD OF SCHOOL EDUCATION BHIWANI Vs. ANKUSH DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed under Section 27a of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1986) by the appellant-opposite party No. 1 against the order dated 7. 2. 2006 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Karnal whereby on the application filed by the respondent No. 1-complainant, the Deputy Secretary of the Board of School Education, Bhiwani, Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the appellant-Board) has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000. In case of non-payment of the fine he will have to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(2.) IN order to decide the present appeal the essential facts need to be stated briefly: The District Forum, Karnal while deciding Complaint No. 454 of 2004 as per order dated 16. 5. 2005 issued the following directions to the appellant-opposite party No. 1: "for the reasons recorded above we hold that OP-1 has wrongly withheld and subsequently cancelled the result of the complainant for no fault of her. Accordingly, the OP-1 is directed to declare the result of the complainant forthwith. As the complainant has already lost one precious academic year on account of non-declaration of her result, so OP-1 is also directed to pay Rs. 20,000 as compensation-cum-cost of litigation to the complainant within a period of 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order. "

(3.) AS the appellant-opposite party No. 1 did not comply with the above stated directions, the complainant filed the execution application which was registered at Sr. No. 80 of 20. 6. 2005 in the District Forum, Karnal. Notice was given to the opposite parties under Section 27 of the Act, 1986 for non-compliance of the directions contains in the order. Thereafter, show-cause notice was issued to the opposite party No. 1. In answer to the show-cause notice, the Deputy Secretary (Legal) appeared on behalf of the appellant through his Counsel and it was stated that the appeal had been filed in the State Commission against the order dated 16. 5. 2005 passed by the District Forum in the above mentioned complaint and it was prayed that till the appeal is decided, no action be taken against the appellant. The District Forum came to the conclusion that the pendency of the appeal before the State Commission does not entitle the appellant-opposite party No. 1 to comply with the order passed and as a period of nine months had lapsed in between the opposite party No. l intentionally, had failed to comply with the order passed in complaint. Consequently, the Deputy Secretary of the opposite party No. 1, who claimed himself to be the person responsible for not complying the order dated 16. 5. 2005, was sentenced as noticed above as per order dated 7. 2. 2006. It is against this order the present appeal has been filed.