K. VELMURUGAN vs Registrar, Pondicherry University

-THE complainant is the appellant. THE case of the complainant is as follows: THE complainant had joined the P.G. Diploma course in Science and Technology Communication conducted by the Pondicherry University during 1997-1998. He had to complete minimum 30 hard core subjects and six soft core subjects, totally 36 in all. As per the rules of Pondicherry University, he has to get certificate for all course except foundation course in Science and Technology. For this the complainant has registered in the Indira Gandhi National Open University. But he has not received the mark list. Only after getting the mark list from the Indira Gandhi National Open University, he can apply for provisional certificate. When he enquired in the local centre of IGNOU, he was told that the mark list would be sent to his house. Subsequently, he contacted Madras and Delhi Centres and he was not able to get any proper reply from them. THE English Department in Pondicherry University was contacted and he was told that it is too late and nothing could be done. THE co-student who studied with him in the Diploma told that he got the course certificate and the complainant alone was not given certificate from IGNOU. Had he been given the certificate, he would have applied for the vacancy called for by the Government of Pondicherry and would have definitely secured a job. Because of the non-availability of the certificate, he was not able to get employment. THErefore, the opposite party may be directed to pay Rs. 1,57,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 16,200/- towards compensation with cost.

THE case of the opposite party is as follows: THE case as projected in the complaint does not come within the ambit and scope of Consumer Protection Act. THE duration of the course is one year. THE candidate has to pass in the course within a maximum period of two years. In other words, the course period of extra one year apart from Diploma course period of one year is granted. THE complainant has 31 credits as per the course. He has admittedly to get five more credit for completion of the course. THE complainant has undergone one year course and he got only 31 credits. THE complainant has not obtained 5 credits from the Indira Gandhi National Open University as claimed by him. He has not been admitted for the 5 credits for which the complainant wants relief. THE complainant is not qualified to obtain diploma in the course for which he was admitted. THE complainant in order to get a diploma, has to obtain 5 more credits to make up 36 credits in all. THErefore, the complainant has to blame himself as he has not secured 5 credits. THE co-student viz., Muthu Andavan has successfully completed the required 36 credits from the University itself and provisional certificate was issued to him only after earning 36 credits. No oral evidence was let in by the parties. On consideration of the materials on record, the District Forum has held that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and consequently the complaint was dismissed without cost. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant has come forward with this appeal. Heard the petitioner in person. The arguments of the learned Counsel for the respondent are also heard. In the appeal, the appellant has filed additional documents and the above documents were marked Exs. C9 to C13.

It is admitted that the complainant joined one year P.G. Diploma course in Science and Telecommunication conducted by the English Department of Pondicherry University during the academic year 1997-98. It is admitted that for obtaining the above said diploma, the complainant had to complete at least 30 hard core and six soft core subjects in the first and second semesters. The complainant has also admitted in his complaint that he had to obtain 36 credits to get diploma. The hard core to be obtained in each subject in the first semester and the soft core to be obtained in second semester are detailed in the complaint. The opposite party has also admitted the above fact. In the complaint, the complainant has taken a plea that he has completed all the subjects except foundation course in Science and Technology (8 hard core) and that for obtaining the said core, he has registered himself in Indira Gandhi National Open University and that they did not send the mark list for the FST. He has also admitted in the complaint that unless the above FST mark list is furnished, he cannot obtain Provisional Certificate in Diploma. Ex. C1 is the Registration Form-1 specifying the number of hard core and soft core to be obtained for the first semester. Ex. C2 is the similar form for the second semester. Ex. C3 will show that the complainant has earned 14 credits. Ex. C4 will show that the complainant has earned 17 credits, totalling 31 credits. It is, thus, clear that the complainant himself categorically admitted that he has obtained 31 credits only and that he has to obtain 5 more credits to get the diploma. The grievance of the complainant is that he has registered himself with IGNOU for obtaining 5 credits. But Ex. C5, the communication sent by IGNOU, will show that the complainant was directed to register for the programme to study within the registration schedule at the regional centre. Ex. C6 is the communication sent by the IGNOU to the complainant wherein it is specifically stated thus: "You have no registration in II year with us. with the result, we are not able to process your case. Your form with D.D., therefore, returned." When the complainant contacted the University, the respondent sent a communication, Ex. C7 stating that the complainant had time to complete the diploma programme until April, 1999 and that it is now more than two years after the timelimit and that it is not possible for the complainant to complete the course.

THE complainant now contends that one of his co-students viz., Muthu Andavan did not also obtain any mark-sheet from IGNOU and that he was issued diploma and that the respondent University has shown discrimination between one student and another student. THE above aspect of the case has been resisted by the opposite party on the ground that Muthu Andavan has obtained the required credit in the respondent university itself. THE documents filed by the complainant himself will substantially establish the case of the opposite party that Muthu Adavan has secured the required credit in the respondent university itself. It is seen that Muthu Andavan has earned 13 credits in the first semester and in the second semester, he has earned 23 credits totaling to 36 credits. THE annexure filed by the respondent will also show the credits earned by the complainant and Muthu Andavan. It is clearly stated in the annexure that the complainant had earned only 31 credits whereas Muthu Andavan earned 36 credits. It is manifestly clear that though Muthu Andavan has not received any mark list from IGNOU, he has earned 36 credits in the respondent university itself which would enable him to obtain diploma course. Now, in the appeal, the complainant has taken a new plea. It is alleged by the complainant/appellant that the respondent university have to make available of 15 hard core and 3 soft core subjects in the first semester and that the university have made available only 10 hard core and 3 soft core subjects in the first semester and that since the respondent university failed to make available of 15 hard core and 3 soft core subjects in the first semester, the complainant could not earn the required credits for obtaining the diploma certificate. It is, however, clear that the complainant has not earned required credits in the first semester. If that is so, we fail to understand as to how his case can be compared with that of Muthu Andavan, who has secured the required credits in the respondent university itself. It is no doubt true that the complainant has paid the full fees for one year for all the 36 credits. The complainant, on his own volition, applied for course in IGNOU. But the complainant was not admitted in the said university. Even assuming that the respondent university failed to conduct all classes in the first semester, the same cannot be agitated at this stage. Further, it is not where pleaded in the complaint that the respondent university failed to conduct all subjects in the first semester and that, therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the respondent university. In the absence of any such plea, the contention of the complainant that the respondent university failed to avail of 15 hard core and 3 soft core credits in the first semester cannot be accepted.

UNLESS and until it is shown that the complainant has earned the required credits in the university even without approaching the IGNOU, he cannot insist the university to issue diploma certificate. The Forum or State Commission cannot direct the respondent university to issue diploma certificate on the ground that they have failed to conduct classes in all subjects in the first semester. As already stated, the complainant has not laid any foundation on the above aspect of the case in the original complaint. Therefore, we are unable to accept the new plea raised in the appeal. Further, the Consumer Forum or the State Commission cannot sit in appeal over the refusal to issue certificate on the ground that the complainant failed to obtain required credits for obtaining the diploma. For the reasons stated above, we are not inclined to accept the case of the complainant. The affidavits of the other students have not been filed by the complainant. Therefore, it is needless to discuss the documents relating to other students. We hold that there are no merits in the appeal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed without cost. Appeal dismissed.