R.C.DIXIT vs PRINCIPAL, ST.PAUL'S SCHOOL

COMPLAINANT is the petitioner before us. He is aggrieved by the order of the State Commission in modifying that of the District Forum and reducing the amount of compensation awarded to him.

PETITIONER got his daughter admitted in respondent''s school in Class XI-A. He paid Rs. 3,290/- as fee which included security money and other charges. For the reason that there was no proper teaching arrangement for a subject (Economics), petitioner withdrew his daughter and put her in another school. For getting transfer certificate he paid Rs. 30/-. Now the petitioner sought refund of the fees paid by him to the respondent school. This school refused to refund except Rs. 500/- which was the security money. Complaining deficiency in service, petitioner went to the District Forum. His complaint was allowed. District Forum directed that he be paid Rs. 2,790/- after making proportionate deduction of Rs. 465/-. PETITIONER was also awarded cost of Rs. 300/-. It was further directed that in case the amount was not paid within 15 days of the receipt of the order it will carry interest @ 12% per annum from the date of order till payment. Respondent School went in appeal before the State Commission. The amount which the petitioner had paid comprised as under :

Petitioner also alleged that he had paid Rs. 500/- as computer fees which fact was not admitted by the school. It was submitted by the school since the petitioner got himself his daughter transferred, he was not entitled to get back the amount of fees paid by him except the security money. It was held by the State Commission that since the act of withdrawing the daughter from the school of the respondent was voluntary, he would not be entitled to refund of admission fee (Rs. 1,000/-), coaching charges (Rs. 270/-), Science fee (Rs. 70/-) amounting to Rs. 1,340/-. State Commission was also of the view that annual sports and maintenance (Rs. 700/-) and library fees Rs. 500/- be refunded after proportionate deduction. State Commission, therefore, directed that security money and examination fee be refunded in full and the annual sports maintenance fees and library fees in proportionate. Accordingly, the order of the District Forum was modified.

PETITIONER has appeared before us in person. He says appeal before the State Commission was filed by the respondent after 60 days of the order of the District Forum and appeal was adjourned on two dates and on that account appeal should have been dismissed. It is difficult to accept this proposition. Our jurisdiction under Clause (b) of Section 21 is limited. PETITIONER was unable to show us as to what was the jurisdictional error in the order of the State Commission for us to interfere. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.