EDUCATION

Suniti Mittal is best student chef
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, Feb 9 — Suniti Mittal of the Institute of Hotel Management, (IHM), Mumbai, was declared the Best Student Chef of the year 2001 at the award ceremony held at the IHM, Sector 42, here today. The Advisor to the UT Administrator, Ms Neeru Nanda, gave away the prizes to the winners of the XV All India Student Chef competition which was hosted by the institute.

Santosh Reddy of the IHM Hyderabad was chosen the second best student chef while Jatin Sethi of the IHM Delhi stood third. The team of Santosh Reddy, Supriya Vagal and V.Sandhya of the IHM Hyderabad won the overall trophy in the Indian cuisine category while the IHM Mumbai came second and the IHM Lucknow came third.

The team of Niladri, Tempa and Harish of the IHM Kolkata won the first prize in the kitchen planning contest while the IHM Mumbai came second and the IHM Jaipur was third. For the continental cuisine the team of Suniti Mittal, Kainaz and Jasleen from the IHM Mumbai won the overall first prize while the IHM Hyderabad came second and the IHM Triruvananthapuram came third. The IHM Mumbai was chosen the overall best followed by the IHM Hyderabad and the IHM Delhi.

Mr R.S. Gujral, Home Secretary,UT Administration, Mr SP Singh, Managing Director, CITCO, Mr Manmohan Singh, President Tourism Promotion Society were also present.

Electron microscopy conference opens
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, Feb 9 — Dr Anupam Verma, National Professor at the IARI, New Delhi delivered the key-note address on Electron microscopy for the diagnosis of viral diseases in plants’ at the opening ceremony of the three-day XXIV annual conference on electron microscopy and allied fields at Panjab University here today. Speaking on the occasion he said electron microscopy had a very significant role to play after the discovery of over 1,000 kinds of plants viruses, which was a very important part of advanced studies in agriculture.

The system provided knowledge on surface structure of viruses. ‘Devastating’ plant diseases showed a way of research through new discoveries.

Prof Ashok Sahni, Chairman of the EMSI, welcomed the guests. Prof M.S. Johal, organising secretary, proposed a vote of thanks.

Prof K.N. Pathak, the Vice-Chancellor, said PU had made significant progress in the field of microscopy in the past two decades.

COURTS

DISTRICT COURTS
7-yr RI for robbery, attempt to murder
From Our Correspondent

CHANDIGARH, Feb 9 — The UT Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mr RC Godara, today sentenced a resident of Palsora, Muni Pal, to seven years rigorous imprisonment in a case of robbery and attempt to murder. The case against the accused had been registered under Sections 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code on February 28, 1999.

The complainant, Mr Om Pal, had stated in the complaint that he, a cloth merchant, had been called by the accused to purchase clothes from him. It was alleged that the accused and his accomplice had taken Rs 1000 from him on gunpoint. The accused had fired a shot when people tried to overpower him. The co-accused in the case had been declared a proclaimed offender.

The Judge stated in the order that the accused was duly convicted of the offence under Section 392, read with Section 397, of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1000. In case of default of payment, the accused had to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of two months. The period for which the convict had remained in custody would be set off from the total period of sentence.

Accused acquitted
The UT Judicial Magistrate (First Class) acquitted a resident of Patiala, Gurmeet, and others, in a case of causing hurt and criminal intimidation. The case against the accused had been registered under Sections 323 and 506 of the Indian Panel Code on the complaint of Mr Surender Singh. The accused was acquitted for lack of evidence.

Judicial remand
The UT Judicial Magistrate (First Class), sent to judicial remand Hawa Singh and Tarun Narula till February 22, under Section 18 of the NDPS Act. It was stated in the complaint that Hawa Singh, a resident of Rajasthan, was arrested by the city police from near the petrol pump in Sector 15 on February 7. One kg of opium was recovered from his possession. The case against the accused had been registered under Section 18 of the NDPS Act.

The another accused, Tarun Narula, a resident of the Patiala, was arrested by the city police from near the local bus stop in Panjab University. It was alleged that the police had recovered 1 kg and 500 g opium from the accused. The case against the accused had been registered under Section 18 of the NDPS Act.

CONSUMER COURTS
Computer institute told to pay compensation
From Our Correspondent

CHANDIGARH, Feb 9 — The UT District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum II has directed Soft Spec Software Private Limited, Sector 8, to pay compensation to a resident of Mani Majra. The complainant, Ms Payal Khanduja, had a stated before the forum that she had taken admission to the computer course in Soft Spec Software Private Limited, which was affiliated with Electronics Niketan, New Delhi.

The complainant had paid Rs 3500 as fees in September, 1995. And the examination was to held in January, 1996. The complainant had also paid Rs 300 to the computer institute as examination fee. The complainant alleged that she did not receive the roll number and on inquiry, she was told that her application had not reached the head office of the computer institute, in New Delhi.

The complainant alleged that she could not appear in the examination and lost one precious year and the chance of gainful employment. The complainant moved a complaint in the forum to direct the computer institute to pay her Rs 45,000 as compensation.

The Bench, comprising president, Mr R.P. Bajaj, and members Mr H.S. Walia and Ms Agnihotri, observed that there was deficiency in the services of Soft Spec Software Private Limited. It was the duty of the computer institute to despatch application forms for the examination and get those filled up from the students and send the same along with the fees to the office concerned.

The forum observed that the head of office the computer institute was not liable to pay compensation to the complainant as the application form had not reached there and the complainant could not have suffered any loss in the matter of getting employment, because she had been employed in LIC.

The forum also observed that the complainant could not appear in the examination in January, 1996, and was put to harassment and inconvenience. Taking overall view of the situation, the forum directed Soft Spec Software Private Limited to pay Rs 1000 as damages to the complainant within one month of the receipt of copy of this order.

Defective raincoat

In another case, the forum has directed Capital Umbrella to pay compensation to a resident of Mullanpur. The complainant, Mr Akhil Kumar, had moved a complaint before the forum that on October 5, 1999, he purchased a raincoat from Capital Umbrella for Rs 490. It was alleged that the private canteen had given him a guarantee that the raincoat was waterproof.

The complainant realised on July 20, 1999, that the raincoat coat was not waterproof. He approached Capital Umbrella a number of times to get the raincoat replaced but the opposite party refused.

The Bench, comprising president, Mr RP Bajaj, and members, Mr H.S Walia, Ms Urvashi Agnihotri, observed that Capital Umbrella had sold a defective raincoat to the complainant. It was liable to replace the same with a new one of equal value of the choice of the complainant within 15 days. If Capital Umbrella failed to replace the raincoat, it should pay to the complainant Rs 490 towards costs of the raincoat along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from October 5, 1999, till the actual payment. The bench also fined it Rs 250 by way of compensation, harassment and cost of litigation.

Receiver for Vivek School sought
From Our Correspondent

CHANDIGARH, Feb 9 — The UT Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ms Sneh Prashar, today adjourned the case till February 12 pertaining to the appointment of a receiver to run Vivek Nursery and Preparatory School, Sector 9, and for issuing directions to the Principal of the school to inform parents of children studying in the school, teachers and staff in writing that the school will close at the end of academic year, March 2001.

The complainants, Ms Bonny Sodhi and Ms Shiela Mamik, had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act seeking the appointment of a receiver and for restraining the Principal and another partner from “dealing with the properties of the partnership concern”.

It was stated in the petition that the school was established and run by a partnership firm. The present partners were Ms Sunaiyna Dass, Ms Sharda Dutt, Ms Bonny Sodhi and Ms Shiela Mamik. All the partners had an equal share in the partnership. It was also stated that over five years ago, three partners — Bonny Sodhi, Ms Shiela Mamik and Ms Sharda Dutt — had appointed the fourth partner — Ms Sunaiyna Dass — as the Principal of the school.

Later, however, differences arose amongst the partners with Ms Sunaiyna Dass and her aunt, Ms Sharda Dutt, on the side and the petitioners Ms Bonny Sodhi and Ms Shiela Mamik on the other. Therefore, the meetings of the partners became few and it was not possible for them to discuss anything related to the school.

The owner and landlord of house number 52, Sector 9, they added, had filed a petition for the ejection of school from the premises on the ground of personal necessity about four years ago, and later filed a petition for the ejection of the school on the ground of non-payment of rent.

It was alleged that the situation resulted in the petitioners being excluded from the management of the school with the support of her aunt, Ms Sharda Dutt, and they were thus in the dark regarding the affairs and running of the school. Several notices were served on Ms Sharda Dutt and Ms Sunaiyna Dass for a partners’ meeting to consider various things but neither Ms Sunaiyna Dass nor Ms Sharda Dutt came to any of the meetings.

It was alleged that on July 31, without the knowledge of the petitioners or their consent, Ms Sunaiyna Dass gave instructions to the Bank of India not to accept fee from parents and also to stop payments from the school accounts. The bank accordingly stopped all operations of the accounts. It was further alleged that Ms Sunaiyna Dass had ever since been demanding the fee and was personally accepting the fees and other dues in cash from parents and had been utilising the money so collected as she wanted without any reference to or knowledge of the applicants.

It was alleged that by stopping the operation of the school bank accounts, Ms Sunaiyna Dass had freed herself of the necessity of obtaining the signatures of Shiela Mamik for withdrawal of money from the bank account and proceeded to collect money personally from parents, and thereafter used it, in the manner she chose. This clearly constituted an act of dishonesty amounting to a breach of trust. She had failed to deposit the employees’ provident fund as required by law and had, thereby, rendered not only herself but the other partners, too, to face the consequences for not depositing the provident fund.

It was requested that in view of the circumstances mentioned, the receiver may be appointed, who would be given all powers to run the institution, and directions may be issued to the Principal of the school to inform the parents of all children studying in the school and also other teachers and staff that the school will close at the end of academic year.