JUDGMENT : Asper S.K. Kulshrestha , J . : - Theseappeals are similar and therefore have been heard together and are beingdecided by this common order. For convenience, facts have been taken from thecase of Anil Kumar Ahirwar , respondent in Appeal No.23/2009 unless otherwise stated. 2.The appellant is a Medical College which admits the students subject to availability of seats 50% from the meritquota and 50% payment seats. It is stated that the respondents in these caseshad approached the college and on the basis of their merit they were selectedagainst the merit seats. The College management also demanded in addition tofee the bank guarantee which they failed to furnish. Accordingly, respondentswere not allowed to continue their studies in the said college. 3.The students approached the Hon'ble High Court and byorder dated 24-2-2006 in Writ Petition No. 12623/2005 the High Court in Para 21gave the following directions :- Resultantly,the writ petitions are allowed. It is directed that the admissions against 26seats of MBBS of State quota filled in by the management by the students of itschoice, the management quota for the academic session 2006-07 shall standreduced to the extent of 26 seats, no additional seat shall be created. Thepetitioners who had opted for MBBS course shall be admitted in the nextacademic year 2006-07 as against the aforesaid seats to be reduced of themanagement quota and if still 26 seats are not utilized, additional studentsshall be allotted on the basis of merit of PMT, 2006 to the correspondingnumber of seats which remain vacant after admissions of the students in theaforesaid manner. The students shall be allotted out of the Pre-Medical Test tobe held in 2006 as per their merit on remaining seats, similar direction holdsgood with respect to seats utilized by the College of BDS course in 2005-06 for theacademic year 2006-07. Parties to bear their own costs as incurred of thesepetitions. 4.Pursuant to these directions the students joined the college except Vivekanand Tiwari . It was in thiscontext that they approached the District Forum for compensation. The DistrictForum vide order dated 6-12-2008 passed n C.C. No. 169/2008, 171/2008, 170/2008and 208/2008 awarded compensation o each student in the sum of Rs . 2 lakhs with interest @ 9%p.a. w.e.f . 1 -10-2005 and Rs .5,000/- for inconvenience, sufferings and mental agony. It was in thiscontext that they approached the District Forum for compensation. The DistrictForum vide order dated 6-12-2008 passed n C.C. No. 169/2008, 171/2008, 170/2008and 208/2008 awarded compensation o each student in the sum of Rs . 2 lakhs with interest @ 9%p.a. w.e.f . 1 -10-2005 and Rs .5,000/- for inconvenience, sufferings and mental agony. 5.The short question that had been raised for our consideration is as to whetherin the facts and circumstances of the case, the students who walked away onbeing asked to furnish bank guarantee, can the institution be blamed for their loss of one year. 6.The bank guarantee can be asked only if there is an apprehension of the studentleaving the institution in the midstream and vacating the seat, which cannot befilled. There is nothing brought on record to show that these students werelikely to leave the college in midstream and to cause financial loss to theinstitution. No evidence or document has been brought on record to support suchan inference. We, therefore, find that the District Forum has in no way erredin directing payment of compensation for loss of one year of these students.However, the compensation of Rs . 2 ,00,000 /-is on the higher side. We feel that the compensation of Rs .1 lakh with interest @ 9% p.a. from 1-10-2005, i.e.,the cut-off date would be reasonable, the direction to pay Rs .5,000/- for physical and mental sufferings and direction to pay interest @ 9%p.a. on failure to comply with the order within one month is also upheld. 7.Thus, these appeals are partly allowed. In each case the compensation of Rs . 2 lakh is brought down to Rs . 1 lakh and interest as statedin the order. With this modification in the order of the District Forum, theseappeals are disposed of. 8.This order be retained in Appeal No. 23/2009 and a copy each be placed inAppeal No. 24/2009 ,25 /2009 and 26/2009.