Hyderabad: A city consumer forum has held an Ameerpet-based immigration consultancy liable for deficient service after it failed to convert a client’s visitor visa into a work permit despite collecting fees and promising the conversion within 90 days.
According to a TOI report, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 1, Hyderabad, in an August 3 order, directed Hash Overseas to pay Rs 1.10 lakh as compensation and Rs 15,000 towards litigation costs to Naveen Kumar Muchintala, a private employee from Dilsukhnagar.
Muchintala had approached the consultancy for help converting a Canada visit visa into a work permit. According to his complaint, he paid Rs 50,000 in service fees and Rs 10,911 towards immigration charges. He borrowed Rs 10 lakh to maintain the bank balance the process required, incurring a monthly interest burden.
He alleged that the consultancy filed his Canada application incorrectly, leading to its rejection. An Australian visitor visa was then obtained, but the promised work permit conversion never materialised, he said.
Hash Overseas denied any deficiency in service. It argued that work visa approval ultimately rests with employers, and that changes in Australian government policy had disrupted the conversion process. The consultancy said Muchintala himself had chosen to switch his preference from Canada to Australia, and that the conversion could not go through because his qualifications did not match job requirements, apart from the policy changes. It further contended that Muchintala had paid only for visitor visa processing, not for conversion into a work permit, so the conversion service was free and fell outside the consumer commission’s jurisdiction.
The commission noted that in a reply notice dated Dec 23, 2024, the consultancy had offered to refund Rs 50,000, even though the agreement contained no refund clause. Muchintala refused the offer.
It found it undisputed that the Canada application was rejected because of an error by a consultancy employee, and held that the service agreement covered both immigration and work visa processing. Securing a visitor visa alone, without the promised conversion, defeated the purpose for which Muchintala had engaged the firm, the commission observed, even while noting that the conversion process had stalled following changes in Australian regulations.
Calling the exercise “futile,” the commission ruled that providing a visitor visa without the assured conversion did not fulfil the intent of the contract, and that the failure amounted to both a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
Allowing the complaint in part, the commission ordered Hash Overseas to pay the compensation and litigation costs within 45 days, failing which the compensation amount will attract 6 percent annual interest from the date the complaint was filed.
