DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE Vs. KASUKURTHY SHYAM BABU
LAWS(APCDRC)-2008-12-5
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on December 19,2008

DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE Appellant
VERSUS
Kasukurthy Shyam Babu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

D.APPA RAO, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal preferred by the opposite party No. 3 against the order of the District Forum, Prakasam at Ongole in C.D. No. 124/2005, in allowing the complaint and directing him along with opposite party No. 1 to pay the amount covered under -Prathibha Award - together with compensation of Rs. 5,000 and costs of Rs. 1,000.
(2.) THE case of the complainant in brief is that he appeared for 7th class examination and stood first in the class, got 545 marks out of 600 marks. He being handicapped person was declared as winner of -Prathibha Award - in the school. However, the said award was not given to him but given to one K. Chaitanya, who got 529 marks. This was undoubtedly a mistake on its part. When a notice was issued demanding the appellant to give the award and pay the amount, it was not paid. Therefore, he sought the amount covered under the cash certificate besides a compensation of Rs. 5,000 towards mental agony and costs.
(3.) OPPOSITE parties 1, 2 and 4 namely, Principal, District Collector and Secretary resisted the case by filing a counter while admitting that the complainant was declared as winner, they stated that they were neither the sponserors nor sanctioning authorities and that it was the D.E.O. i.e. the appellant herein was competent authority for giving the said award. First opposite party also submitted that he joined as Principal on 22.11.2002 and the award pertained to the period 1999 -2000 and therefore he was not liable. The complaint was not maintainable against them as they were not proper parties and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. The appellant filed counter stating that opposite party No. 1 sent his report that K. Chaitanya, got 529 marks under the said category and the name of the complainant was not sent to him. He was not selected due to non submission of particulars of physically handicapped certificate or non -availability of community certificate and as he was treated as O.C. category, he was not selected. In view of the above the complainant was not selected and submitted that there is no deficiency of service on his behalf.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.