The Kannur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered an overseas recruitment consultancy, its managerial staff, and an associated travel agency to pay Rs 3.16 lakh to a contract worker after failing to secure him an overseas job despite collecting payments over several months.
In an order issued on September 29, a bench comprising Commission President Ravi Susha alongside members Moly Kutty Mathew and Sajeesh K. P. held the firms accountable for unfair trade practices and deficiency in service. The panel determined that the recruitment entities deliberately deceived the applicant by repeatedly shifting his job destination across different European nations while failing to deliver on their commitments.
Financial Breakdown Of The Award
Under the directives issued by the district forum, the consultancy and its management personnel are required to refund Rs 2.56 lakh, representing the balance amount collected from the applicant for visa processing and tax documentation.
In addition, the commission ordered the consultancy firm, its managers, and the travel agency to jointly and severally pay Rs 50,000 as compensation for the mental distress caused to the applicant, alongside Rs 10,000 to cover his legal expenses. All payments must be cleared within a 30-day compliance window.
Neither the consultancy nor the travel agency submitted written responses to the commission, despite formal notices being served to both entities.
Chronology Of Shifting Commitments
The complainant, a commerce graduate employed as a subcontract supervisor with the Kerala Water Authority, had sought overseas work to support his dependents. His engagement with the recruiters began in October 2023, when a company representative pitched employment in Malta, citing streamlined visa formalities, at an overall fee of Rs 7.50 lakh.
On November 2, 2023, the worker transferred an initial payment of Rs 1 lakh to the travel agency. When follow-up inquiries yielded no progress, the recruiters cited operational advantages in Lithuania and altered his proposed destination. Following a subsequent six-month delay, the agency redirected him a second time, advising him to apply for work in Austria.
To proceed with the Austrian visa and work permit formalities, the applicant was instructed to visit the consultancy’s office in Ernakulam and submit his original credentials. He transferred Rs 2.50 lakh to the consultancy on February 17, 2025, and subsequently remitted Rs 6,000 to a manager on July 8, 2025, earmarked for income tax return filings.
Findings Of The Consumer Forum
Although the travel agency eventually returned the initial Rs 1 lakh deposit on October 3, 2025, the remaining Rs 2.56 lakh retained by the consultancy was never reimbursed, prompting the complainant to seek legal redress.
Reviewing the record, the commission noted that the applicant had acted in good faith while expecting legitimate employment abroad. The bench observed that systematically altering the destination from Malta to Lithuania and ultimately Austria, coupled with the routine cancellation of scheduled visa appointments, established that the recruiters had actively misled the job seeker.
The panel concluded that the failure to facilitate the promised Austrian work placement following receipt of payment constituted a clear dereliction of duty, making the agencies liable for the financial loss and distress suffered by the complainant.
