University Non refund of fees even though services not availed, violation of UGC refund policy

S

sahasukanto60

New member
Institute Name
Jagdish Sheth School of Management under Vijaybhoomi University
Customer Care Number
+91 814797313
Loss Amount
49000
Ratings
2.00 star(s)
Opposite Party Address
Centre for Developmental Education, Vijaybhoomi University – Village Jamrung, Post Ambivali, Taluka Karjat, Dist Raigad, Maharashtra 410201
Complainant Details:

Name: Sukanto Saha

Address: Renuka Complex, Tembhode Road, Palghar Maharashtra 401404

Application No.: JAGSOMMBA202510270

Institute: JAGSoM (Vijaybhoomi University)

Amount in Dispute: ₹49,000 (unjustified withholding of refund)



---

Opposite Party (Defendant) Details:

Name: JAGSoM (Vijaybhoomi University)

Address: Centre for Developmental Education, Vijaybhoomi University – Village Jamrung, Post Ambivali, Taluka Karjat, Dist Raigad, Maharashtra 410201

Vice Chancellor: Mr. Rakesh Mediratta



---

Facts of the Case:

1. Enrolment and Fee Payment: The complainant, Sukanto Saha, enrolled in the MBA program at JAGSoM and paid ₹5,00,000, which included ₹50,000 for various fees such as registration, foundation courses, and processing fees.


2. Request for Admission Withdrawal: On 23rd May 2025, the complainant formally requested to withdraw from the program well before the admission deadline of 14th June 20245, as mentioned in the university’s website. Despite this early request, the university withheld ₹49,000, stating it as a non-refundable fee for the Foundation Course in Management.


3. Conflict with Refund Policy: The UGC Refund Policy (October 2018) clearly stipulates that only ₹5,000 can be deducted as processing fees if the student withdraws before the last date of admission. Despite the complainant withdrawing well before the formally notified last date of admission, the university has unjustifiably withheld ₹49,000, which violates the provisions of the UGC Refund Policy.


4. Unjustified Withholding of Fees: The Foundation Course in Management was neither attended nor availed by the complainant, and no services were rendered in return for the ₹49,000 fee. Under the Indian Contract Act, there must be an exchange of service for payment. The complainant did not receive any service or benefit from the Foundation Course, making the deduction of ₹49,000 unjustified.


5. Inconsistency in Fee Breakdown: The receipt issued to the complainant describes the ₹50,000 as a "processing fee", while the fee structure breakdown lists it as "registration + foundation course". This inconsistency raises concerns about the transparency of the fee structure and points to a potential violation of fair trade practices under the Consumer Protection Act.


6. Request for Clarification: The complainant raised several queries regarding the refund, which were not addressed satisfactorily by the institution. These queries included the rationale behind the ₹49,000 deduction. Despite clear guidelines by the UGC and the Consumer Protection Act, the institution has failed to provide reasonable answers.




---

Relief Sought:

In view of the above facts and the violation of the UGC Refund Policy and the Consumer Protection Act, the complainant humbly requests the Hon'ble Forum to:

1. Order JAGSoM to refund the withheld ₹49,000 to the complainant, as the services for which the fee was charged were not availed.


2. Direct the institution to follow UGC Refund Policy (October 2018) and process the refund of ₹4,95,000 within a reasonable time frame (earlier than the stated 30th November 2025, possibly till the end of June/July 2025).

---

Grounds of Complaint:

1. Violation of the UGC Refund Policy (October 2018):
The withholding of ₹49,000 violates the UGC's guidelines on the maximum deduction of ₹5,000 as processing fees.


2. Violation of the Indian Contract Act (1872):
As per the Indian Contract Act, there should be a service rendered for any payment made. Since no services were availed in the Foundation Course, the deduction of ₹49,000 is unlawful.


3. Violation of the Consumer Protection Act (2019):
The institute’s actions amount to unfair trade practices, as they have not clearly communicated the reason for the ₹49,000 fee deduction and are withholding money for services not provided.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello @sahasukanto60

We understand your concern regarding the non-refund of the full amount by the university after your enrollment and subsequent withdrawal within a few days.

Please be informed that as per the University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines, if a student withdraws from a course before the commencement of classes or within a stipulated period, the university is obligated to refund the fees after deducting only a minimal processing fee (not exceeding ₹1,000). The relevant UGC notification titled "UGC Notification on Refund of Fees and Non-Retention of Original Certificates" (D.O. No. 1-3/2007(CPP-II)), lays out the refund policy clearly.

If the university is refusing to refund the full amount in violation of these guidelines, you have the right to file a case against them in the consumer forum for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices.

We are here to support you throughout the process. We will assist you in:
  • Drafting your consumer complaint
  • Collecting relevant documents and evidence
  • Filing your case before the appropriate consumer dispute redressal commission
Please share the details of your admission, payment receipts, and any communication from the university.

Thanks
 
Thank you very much for your prompt and supportive response.
Please find attached the relevant documents for your reference:
1. Admission Confirmation Mail stating 50,000 as token amount
2. Another mail stating 50,000 as registration plus foundation course fees (never enrolled in the course, nor availed any service)
3. Receipt of 5,00,000 with 50,000 being showed as processing fees.
4. Another mail stating the entire 50,000 as registration fees.
5. Withdrawal mail (submitted on 23 May)
6. Response to the withdrawal mail (on 27 May)
7. JAGSoM's withdrawal form with clauses contradictory to the public policy
8. Email thread with JAGSoM and its higher authorities.
9. MBA program's AICTE approval misrepresentation


Legal Justification for Full Refund under Indian Contract Act, 1872

I would also like to respectfully highlight that the withholding of ₹49,000 violates not only the UGC Refund Policy but also fundamental provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

As per Section 2(d) of the Act, a contract is valid only when there is lawful consideration – i.e., a promise in exchange for a service. In this case, the so-called "Foundation Course in Management" was never attended or availed by me, and no service was rendered whatsoever. Hence, the consideration (₹49,000) failed.

Further, Section 25 of the Act states that an agreement made without consideration is void. The service (foundation course) that allegedly justifies the ₹49,000 was not delivered, and therefore the agreement becomes void.

Most importantly, under Section 65, if a party to a void agreement receives any benefit or advantage, that party is bound to return it. Since JAGSoM collected ₹49,000 from me without delivering any associated service, they are legally obligated to refund this amount.

Therefore, even if the institution terms the amount as “non-refundable” in its internal policy, such a clause cannot override statutory protections granted under Indian law. Non-refundable clauses are not enforceable when they contradict the principles of consideration and service delivery established under Indian contract law.

Additional Clarifications and Institutional Conduct:

I would also like to bring to your attention the misleading and unclear conduct of the institution throughout this process:

1. Internal Policy vs. UGC Policy: On a phone call with a JAGSoM representative on 30th May, I was informed that filling out the withdrawal form is part of their internal refund process. However, when I mentioned that I was pursuing my grievance under UGC refund policy, I was told that the “management will decide based on UGC policy, check the UGC website, and then get back to me.” Despite this, no such update or clarification was ever provided. The only response I kept receiving — even after repeated clarification — was a repetitive request to fill the withdrawal form, without addressing the critical concerns I raised.


2. Problem with Signing the Withdrawal Form: The withdrawal form contains clauses that are directly contradictory to UGC refund guidelines, including a statement that refunds will be processed only by 30th November and that ₹50,000 is non-refundable. I have made it clear multiple times that I am not refusing to fill the form arbitrarily, but only because signing it — in its current form — could be interpreted as waiving my rights under UGC policy, especially if the complaint is closed on that basis on the UGC e-Samadhan platform.


3. Uninformed Administration: In my follow-up emails to senior authorities, including the President and Vice Chancellor, I found that they were not even aware of my case details, which contradicts the claim that my matter was being discussed by the “management.” This raised serious doubts about whether any genuine internal review or decision-making has actually taken place since my complaint was filed.


4. Misrepresentation of AICTE Approval: Furthermore, JAGSoM had previously stated on their website that their MBA program was AICTE-approved, even though it was not. Upon pointing this out, they quietly edited the website to reflect only UGC approval — which, notably, was not originally mentioned. I have taken screenshots as proof of this misleading claim and its subsequent removal.



This pattern of inconsistency, lack of transparency, and avoidance of regulatory compliance has only deepened my concern and worsened the anxiety caused by this entire situation. I respectfully urge the authorities to take immediate and appropriate action in this matter.


I would also like to respectfully mention that while my primary concern and request pertains to the refund of my fees—which remains the most important issue for me—I came across a related observation which I am not entirely sure about, but still felt it may be relevant.

I could not find any publicly accessible information regarding a Student Grievance Redressal Committee (SGRC) or Ombudsperson specific to JAGSoM Mumbai. While I understand that JAGSoM functions under Vijaybhoomi University, which do have such mechanisms in place, while going through notices and circulars published by UGC, I came across its 2023 Redressal of Grievances of Students Regulations that requires all higher educational institutions to establish its own SGRC and appoint Ombudsman. I thought it would be appropriate to highlight this in case it helps students at JAGSoM who may be in need of grievance redressal in the future.

Please excuse me if I am mistaken in raising this, but I shared it in good faith with the intention of supporting student welfare and institutional accountability.


Thanking you for your support in this time of uncertainty.
 

Attachments

Hello @sahasukanto60

We have carefully reviewed all the details and documents you have submitted regarding your complaint. Based on our thorough evaluation, we regret to inform you that the only viable option left is to file a case before the nearest District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.
You can file the case through the online e-Jagriti portal: e-jagriti Platform: Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food, and Public Distribution, Government of India

To initiate your complaint, the following documents need to be submitted:
  1. Index – A list of all enclosures/documents attached.
  2. Memo of Parties – Details of the complainant(s) and respondent(s).
  3. Affidavit – A sworn statement verifying the contents of the complaint.
  4. List of Events / Chronology – A timeline of key events related to the issue.
  5. Supporting Documents – Invoices, receipts, communication proofs, warranty cards, etc.
We can assist you by:
  • Drafting all the necessary documents (Index, Complaint, Affidavit, List of Events, etc.)
  • Uploading and filing the complaint on the Consumer Forum website on your behalf
  • Guiding you through the hearing process and next steps
If you would like to proceed, kindly confirm, and we will begin preparing your case files right away.

We have already filed a similar case, please review

8

College Thread 'Money is not refund by College'

Nutan mahapatra
Word no-7 ,Kapsila ,padampur
Ps-padampur ,pin-768036 (Bargarh)

1- I took admission in M.sc(Botany) at Pranavi Distance Education ,ijjavaram near naupada railway station ,tekkali ,Dist-srikakulam ,pin 532212 ,Andhra pradesh in 19.7.2023 which comes under Sri venkateswar univerity & paid fees of 17500.
2-After few days i contact the college for books & exam quary ..but the college staff said that university did send any notice to conduct exam .Several time they replyed same answer .
3-The college staff also told me that don't worry your admission about confirmed by...

Thanks
 
Back
Top