TELEPHONE D.M., BHUJ vs JAMNADAS MIRCHUMAL

THE appellant is the original opponent who being aggrieved by the decision of the District Forum, Bhuj, Kachchh has challenged the order dated 11.10.91 in complaint No. 56/91, THE only point involved was whether the Telephone Department can disconnect the telephone on account of arrears of telephone bills without issuing show-cause notice.

MR. Dave, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Department has relied upon Rule 443 which does not provide such show-cause notice because according to MR. Dave the bill itself in specific word''s states that if the bill is not paid within the specified time the telephone connection will be disconnected. MR. Dave states that the disputed bill of Rs. 2,188/- was not paid by the complainant, during the specified time and thereafter for sometime also. The complainant was also reminded for the arrears by telephone. However the District Forum relying upon the decision of the Guwahati High Court in the case of Santok Singh v. Divisional Engineer Telephones, Shillong reported AIR 1990 Guwahati P. 47 observed that the Department is bound to give a show-cause notice before the telephone is disconnected.

A plain reading of the provisions of Rule 443, we are of the opinion that there is no provision of issuing such a show-cause notice. We have held in other cases also that such special show-cause notice is not necessary before the power under Rule 443 may be exercised. There is an appeal over this decision of the Guwahati High Court in the Supreme Court and that decision is not binding to this Commission in view of the observations made by the Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s. Arun Paper Products, Ahmedabad v. Union of India & Ors. reported in 1989 (1) GLH 186. We shall have therefore to allow the appeal of the appellant.

MR. Dave fairly states that the Department will not recover the reconnection charges since the telephone has already been reconnected under the orders of the District Forum. However, MR. Dave states that the Department should not be directed to pay the cost since the Department succeeds. We shall have to accept this prayer of the appellant. ORDER The appeal is allowed. The decision of the District Forum, Bhuj is set aside. The Department shall not recover the reconnection or any other charges. In the circumstances there will be no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.