Father paid Rs 2.9 lakh for son’s engineering admission, but he was stopped from taking the exam over unpaid fees; court orders college to pay Rs 2.27 lakh

A dispute over an engineering college admission has ended with the Jammu and Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directing Acharya Institute of Technology in Bengaluru to pay Rs 2,27,965 to a Jammu-based father whose son was stopped from appearing for an examination over unpaid admission fees.

The commission held the institute responsible for the amount retained by two people who had helped secure the student's admission. It also allowed the father to withdraw an earlier Rs 1.53 lakh awarded in the case, along with applicable interest.

Read more - He scored 41 in Maths and 48 in Science in class 10; then changed his study habits, cracked JEE with 99.98 percentile & made it to IIT Bombay

Father paid Rs 2.90 lakh for son's admission

According to the commission's order, Lakhinder Singh Sambyal paid Rs 2.80 lakh to respondent No. 3 for securing admission for his son, Dhananjay Singh, to Acharya Institute of Technology.

He also paid Rs 10,000 as commission to respondents No. 2 and 3, taking the total amount handed over to them to Rs 2.90 lakh.

Separately, Dhananjay paid Rs 1,03,350 towards tuition fees and Rs 25,000 towards hostel expenses directly to the institute. Receipts were issued for these payments.

Student stopped from exam over unpaid fee

Lakhinder alleged that the two respondents failed to deposit the Rs 2.90 lakh admission fee with the college. As a result, his son was stopped from appearing in his first-term examination because the admission fee had not been cleared.

Dhananjay subsequently had to leave the institute.

The father and son, with police assistance, managed to recover Rs 2 lakh from respondents No. 2 and 3. However, Rs 90,000 remained unpaid.

They then approached the consumer commission seeking Rs 8,08,350 in compensation and other claims. The amount included the Rs 90,000 still due, tuition and hostel fees, expenses incurred during repeated trips to Bengaluru, and compensation for the harassment and hardship.

Consumer commission had earlier awarded Rs 1.53 lakh

The commission had previously directed the institute to pay Rs 1.53 lakh on June 18, 2019.

The amount included Rs 1,03,350 towards the tuition fee paid to the institute and Rs 50,000 towards the inconvenience, harassment and legal and other expenses faced by the father and son.

The institute had not appeared before the commission at that stage, and the order was passed without hearing its side.

The complainants later approached the Jammu and Kashmir High Court. The High Court allowed them to withdraw the Rs 1.53 lakh deposited by the institute, subject to the condition that the amount would have to be returned if the case was ultimately decided against them.

The remaining issues were sent back to the consumer commission for consideration.

College sought to reopen the case

During the proceedings, respondent No. 2 died. Respondent No. 3 did not appear despite a notice being published in a local newspaper and was subsequently proceeded against ex parte.

The institute later sought permission to submit a fresh written statement, arguing that it had not been properly served when the original case was decided.

The consumer commission rejected the request. It said the High Court had remanded the matter only for deciding the remaining Rs 90,000 claim and the interest component.

"It is a settled legal preposition that the scope for adjudication in case of remand gets narrowed down to the issues left open by the higher court either expressly or impliedly," the commission said.

It added that the institute could make arguments based on the material already on record but could not restart the proceedings by filing a fresh written statement.

Commission finds link between college and admission agents

The institute also argued that it had no connection with respondents No. 2 and 3.

The commission, however, rejected this argument. It observed that Dhananjay would not have been admitted if the institute had not been assured that the admission fee had been paid through respondent No. 3.

The bench comprising President Nighat Sultana and Member Maheep Gupta concluded that there was an arrangement between the institute and the two individuals and that respondents No. 2 and 3 were acting as agents of the institute.

"We, therefore, have no hesitation in concluding that the O.P. 1 & rest of the O.P.s were definitely having some type of tie-up arrangement amongst themselves wherein O.P. 2 & O.P. 3 were acting as agents of O.P. 1," the commission said.

College ordered to pay Rs 2.27 lakh

After considering the remaining amount, the commission held the institute vicariously liable for the recovery due from the other respondents.

After excluding the Rs 10,000 claim against respondent No. 2, who had died, Rs 80,000 remained to be recovered.

The commission added Rs 85,572 as interest on the Rs 80,000 at 6% per annum from October 20, 2008, the date of filing of the complaint, to August 14, 2026.

It also added Rs 62,393 towards interest on the earlier Rs 1,03,000 award.

The total amount payable by the institute was therefore fixed at Rs 2,27,965.

College given 30 days to make payment

The consumer commission directed Acharya Institute of Technology to pay Rs 2,27,965 within 30 days of the order.

If the institute fails to make the payment within the stipulated period, an additional interest of 6% per annum will apply to the amount from August 15, 2026 until the payment is made.

Lakhinder was also permitted to withdraw the earlier Rs 1.53 lakh deposited by the institute, along with any interest accrued on it, if the amount had not already been withdrawn.

Both sides were directed to bear their own legal costs.

The order was passed on August 14, 2026.