Sabir Khan Vs. Delhi Institute of Computer Sciences

Sabir Khan vs Delhi Institute of Computer Sciences

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi Decided Jan 21, 2009

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1111598

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1111598
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Judge: J.D. Kapoor, President &Amp; the Honourable Ms. Justice Rumnita Mittal, Member
Decided On: Jan 21, 2009
Case Number: Appeal No. FA-08 of 1090
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 15 - Comparative Citation: 2009 (4) CPJ 378

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sabir Khan

Respondent

Delhi Institute of Computer Sciences

Excerpt

consumer protection act, 1986 - section 15 - comparative citation: 2009 (4) cpj 378.....an animator and he will earn about rs. 30,000 per month. 3. the respondent also promised to give him job after completing the course. the course was only conducted to work and in a dirty environment. the students complained to the director but no action was taken to improve the system. on the completion of the course the op gave him diploma. but the respondent did not complete the multimedia course for which he had joined the institute and not (sic.) provided by the respondent as promised by him. 4. the respondent averred that the complaint is baseless and frivolous, as the same has been filed only with the ulterior motive and mala fide intention to extract money. the appellant took admission with the respondent and opted for diploma in multimedia being conducted by the respondent and also appeared in the examination for grant of scholarship which is totally sponsored by the respondent and a scholarship of 75% of the total fee was also granted to the appellant by the respondent and the same was not offered by the ministry of information and technology. the admission form of the appellant is exhibited as ex-rw 1/1. 5. it appears that appellant has filed the complaint for not having been provided the job. unless and until there is a written assurance given by the institute for placement and for providing the job, job is never assured. job depends upon the merits of the candidate. 6. it has been observed by the district forum that the appellant has taken admission with the respondent in respect of the diploma course in multimedia being conducted by the respondent. the examination form exhibit ex. rw 1/1 on records shows that the applicant has taken admission voluntarily. there is also examination form on the records, which also shows that the appellant appeared in the examination voluntarily. the respondent has also provided diploma to the appellant which is exhibited as ex. rw 1/3 on the records and the duration of the course was july, 06 to july 07 and the grade.....

Full Judgment

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral):

1. On the allegation of having not provided job after completion of the Diploma Course in spit of assurance, the appellant filed the instant complaint for the compensation and loss suffered by him. However, the complaint vide order dated 5.11.2008 was dismissed on the ground that there was no such assurance and more over the appellant has paid Rs. 11,000 towards registration fees of the entire Diploma Course further that the time in conducting the examination was also not much.

2. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal on the premise that he took the admission with the respondent and opted for diploma course in multimedia being conducted by the respondent and also appeared in the examination for grant of scholarship which is totally sponsored by the respondent and a scholarship of 75% of the total fee was also granted to the appellant by the respondent. The respondent told him that the examination is being conducted by the Ministry of Technology. The appellant had deposited Rs. 11,000 to the respondent and got admission along with 250 students. At the time of admission the respondent showed many dreams and promised that he will become computer operator in six months and after nine months he will be a Graphic Designer and in a year he will become an Animator and he will earn about Rs. 30,000 per month.

3. The respondent also promised to give him job after completing the course. The course was only conducted to work and in a dirty environment. The students complained to the Director but no action was taken to improve the system. On the completion of the course the OP gave him diploma. But the respondent did not complete the Multimedia course for which he had joined the Institute and not (sic.) provided by the respondent as promised by him.

4. The respondent averred that the complaint is baseless and frivolous, as the same has been filed only with the ulterior motive and mala fide intention to extract money. The appellant took admission with the respondent and opted for diploma in multimedia being conducted by the respondent and also appeared in the examination for grant of scholarship which is totally sponsored by the respondent and a scholarship of 75% of the total fee was also granted to the appellant by the respondent and the same was not offered by the Ministry of Information and Technology. The Admission Form of the appellant is exhibited as EX-RW 1/1.

5. It appears that appellant has filed the complaint for not having been provided the job. Unless and until there is a written assurance given by the Institute for placement and for providing the job, job is never assured. Job depends upon the merits of the candidate.

6. It has been observed by the District Forum that the appellant has taken admission with the respondent in respect of the diploma course in multimedia being conducted by the respondent. The examination form Exhibit Ex. RW 1/1 on records shows that the applicant has taken admission voluntarily. There is also examination form on the records, which also shows that the appellant appeared in the examination voluntarily. The respondent has also provided diploma to the appellant which is exhibited as Ex. RW 1/3 on the records and the duration of the course was July, 06 to July 07 and the grade was given to the appellant âvoluntarilyâ. It is also provided by the records that including the registration fees the appellant has only paid Rs. 11,000 with the respondent which is also admitted by the appellant. Therefore in these circumstances if any job was not provided to the appellant it is not the fault of the respondent.

7. Since the respondent has already been provided the Diploma Course Certificate after completion of the Diploma Course. We do not find any merit in the appeal. Hence the same is dismissed.

8. FDR/Bank Guarantee, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith after completion of due formalities.

9. Copy of Order be forwarded to the parties free of cost as per statutory requirement and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to record.

Appeal dismissed.

Same Court & Year Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New ... Same Parties Sabir Khan vs Delhi Institute of Computer Sciences Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge J.D. Kapoor, President &Amp; the Honourable Ms. Justice Rumni...

Right to Information