The Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has upheld an order directing Deen Dayal Upadhyay University, Gorakhpur, to pay Rs 2.55 lakh to a student after finding that the university failed to issue her academic documents despite accepting the prescribed fee.
A bench comprising Commission President Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava and Member Sudha Upadhyay dismissed the university’s appeal on July 23, affirming the October 12, 2023 decision of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri. The State Commission held that the district forum’s order did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity requiring appellate interference.
Student’s Complaint
The dispute arose from events dating back to 2013. According to the case, student Kamaljeet Kaur deposited Rs 900 with the university in March that year for the issuance of her provisional certificate and other academic documents.
She alleged that despite payment of the prescribed fee, the university did not provide the documents. The student claimed she made repeated requests to obtain the records needed for higher education and employment, but the university failed to release them.
Contending that the prolonged delay caused mental distress and financial hardship, she approached the District Consumer Commission, alleging deficiency in service.
District Commission’s Findings
After examining the material placed before it, the District Consumer Commission ruled in favour of the student on October 12, 2023.
The forum directed the university to issue the required academic documents and awarded Rs 2.5 lakh as compensation for the harassment and mental agony suffered by the student. It also granted Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses, taking the total monetary relief to Rs 2.55 lakh.
The district commission concluded that the university had failed to fulfil its obligations despite receiving the prescribed fee for issuing the documents.
State Commission Rejects University’s Appeal
Challenging the district commission’s decision, Deen Dayal Upadhyay University argued before the State Consumer Commission that the order was erroneous and should be set aside.
After hearing the parties and examining the record, the State Commission declined to interfere. It held that the findings recorded by the district commission were supported by the evidence on record and found no legal or factual error warranting appellate intervention.
With the dismissal of the appeal, the university remains bound to comply with the directions issued by the district commission, including payment of Rs 2.55 lakh to the student and issuance of the withheld academic documents.
