|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, such unfair and one-sided conditions do not bind the students. A college cannot take shelter under such conditions, to deny a refund. In a number of cases brought before it, the apex consumer court has made it clear that colleges cannot deny a refund on the basis of such undertakings taken from students. In Shri Saravpreet Singh vs the Principal, Lala Lajpat Rai Institute of Engineering and Technology, Moga, for example, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission reiterated that students are not bound by unfair terms and conditions. Such undertakings violate the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) as well as the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) on refund of fees. As per these guidelines, if a student withdraws before the starting of the course, then the entire fee collected from the student should be returned. The college can only retain a maximum of Rs 1,000 towards processing charges. If a student, after joining the course, wishes to leave, and the seat so left vacant is filled by another candidate by the last date of admission, then the institution should return the fee with proportionate deductions of monthly fee and hostel rent, where applicable. The AICTE has also warned that those colleges that do not follow these guidelines are liable for action.
Whom does one approach for refund? Under the AICTE Regulations 2012, every AICTE-approved institution and technological university has to set up a grievance-redressal committee and an Ombudsman for redress of grievances of students and parents. One can write to the committee and if there is no satisfactory redress there, complain to the Ombudsman, who has to dispose of the case within a month. All institutions have to give the contact details of the Ombudsman as well as the Commiittee on their websites. In case the problem is not resolved by the Ombudsman, students/parents can also approach the consumer courts. Consumer courts, in some cases, have even gone beyond the AICTE guidelines and directed colleges to refund the fees even when the seat left vacant by the withdrawal of the student is not filled. In Ganapati college of Engineering for Girls vs Vijeta and others, one of the main arguments of the college was that it was not bound to refund the fee as the seats vacated were not filled . It quoted the conditions governing the refund framed by the Director, Technical Education, Haryana and the Haryana State Counselling Society in support. Dismissing this argument, the court pointed out that out of the sanctioned 300 seats, the institute had forwarded a list of only 69 candidates for taking the university exam. On account of large number of vacancies, the institution had no waiting list of admission seekers. There was no possibility of filling the seats vacated by four students. So they cannot be blamed and denied refund.
|
|||
|
|
|||
Many colleges do not refund the fees or repay only 50 per cent. They ask students to sign an undertaking saying that they will not ask for a refund in case of admission into another college. Does the undertaking take away the student's right to a refund?
