ORDER Mr. Justice Surinder Sarup, President: This appeal is against the order of the teamed District Forum, Mandi, dated 13.8.2003, as a result of which the appellant has been directed to refund the tuition fees of Rs. 9,200/- to the respondent with interest of 9% per annum from the date of deposit and to pay Rs. 2,000/- as compensatory damages cum costs to her. 2. The case of the respondent as complainant is that she obtained admission in the Himachal Dental College, Sundernagar, District Mandi, in the first year and was made to deposit a sum of Rs. 13,010/-as tuition fees etc. although in the prospectus for the combined Pre-Medical Entrance Test under Note No. 1, page 19, it was provided that girl students are not required to pay fee. On this condition being pointed out to the Principal of the said College, he assured her that the above mentioned amount would be refunded. Ultimately, only the amount of security was refunded but not the balance amount, notwithstanding the fact that she had neither attended any class during her stay of two days there, nor made use of the library books. This was because meanwhile she had got admission in MBBS Course prescribed by the Himachal Pradesh University in a recognised College and had to pay fresh tuition fees for that course. Hence, the complaint. 3. In the reply, it was stated on behalf of the appellant that the amount of Rs. 13,010/- deposited by way of tuition fee etc. by the respondent was not liable to be refunded inasmuch as the clause in the prospectus pertaining to non-payment of fees by girl students is applicable to the Government Dental College, Sundernagar is. It was also stated that under prospectus of admission to Dental Colleges issued by the Himachal Pradesh University there is a clear provision that fees once deposited were not refundable. It was further stated that the respondent had herself filed an affidavit to the effect that she will not be entitled to refund to fees by the college authorities in case she leaves the course midstream. 4. The learned District Forum on the basis of the evidence referred to in the impugned order has come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 9,200/- was charged illegally from the respondent and hence the direction contained therein. 4. The learned District Forum on the basis of the evidence referred to in the impugned order has come to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 9,200/- was charged illegally from the respondent and hence the direction contained therein. It is apparent from the discussion in the impugned order that the reliance has been placed on notes Nos. 1 and 4 of the Prospectus appearing at page-19 vide Annexure-O.P. Ill for coming to the conclusion that a combined reading of both shows that the girl students of Himachal Pradesh have been exempted from tuition fees for Medical/Dental education. There is no dispute that the respondent is resident of Himachal Pradesh and therefore, the appellant has been held liable to refund the amount of Rs. 9,200/-. 5. In the present appeal before us, Shri Sham Lai Saini, Administrative Officer of the appellant College has submitted that the complaint of the respondent has been decided in her favour on account of suppression of material facts before the District Forum by her. He has specifically referred to Rule (ii) on page 20 of the prospectus, which is as follows :- "The Private Dental Colleges shall charge fees both for Free as well as payment seats (Excluding NRI) as prescribed by the Committee constituted by the State Government." Relevant extract to this effect of the prospectus of Himachal Pradesh University for combined Pre-Medical Entrance Test is Annexure-C on the record and copy of the Notification of the Government of Himachal Pradesh in the Department of Health and Family Welfare has also been placed on record as Annexure-D. 6. On a perusal of the record, we find that very conveniently only a part of the above-mentioned Prospectus of Himachal Pradesh University was produced in evidence by the respondent as complainant. That extract no doubt states that with a view to attract the Himachali girls in Medical/Dental Education, it has been decided to exempt them from paying the tuition fees till they pass out or for a fixed duration of the course, but the other relevant part of the Prospectus relating to fees for Private Dental Colleges was withheld from the perusal of the District Forum for obvious reasons, meaning thereby that there is force in the submission made on behalf of the appellant that the complainant suppressed material facts there and was successful in securing the order in her favour. We have no doubt in our mind that had all the relevant provisions in the said Prospectus as well as the Notification vide Annexure-D been brought to the notice of the learned District Forum, the result would have been otherwise. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order is erroneous, having been passed without taking into consideration the relevant; provisions relating to fees for Private Dental Colleges as prescribed in the above mentioned Prospectus of Himachal Pradesh University, and is thus liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we accept this appeal and set aside the impugned order.