SHARAD VATS Vs. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Mr.Sharad Vats by this writ petition seeks quashing of impugned notice dated 21.5.1998, Annexure P.1 to the writ petition. Petitioner further seeks a direction restraining the respondents from disconnecting his telephone bearing No.5543391 installed at Flat WZ-338, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi. By the impugned notice petitioner was called upon to clear the outstanding dues amounting to Rs.150254/- (one lac fifty thousand two hundred and fifty four only) in respect of telephone No.5599211 in the name of petitioner's father Lt.Col.S.M. Sharma.

(2.) The facts in so far as they are relevant for the disposal of the writ petition may be briefly noted:- Petitioner's father Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma was the subscriber to telephone No.5599211, installed at the same flat that is WZ-338, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi. Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma had complained about defects in the STD locking system in February, 1992, September 1992, November 1992 and on 4.4.1993. It is the case of the petitioner and his father Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma, that the latter left for USA on 30.4.1994, and remained there with his daughter that is petitioner's sister till 6.7.1994. It is contended that neither Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma nor any member of the petitioner or his family resided in the flat during the above period. The petitioner's father, however, received the following bills for the billing cycle mentioned below in respect of telephone No.5599211:

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid billing, the petitioner's father Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma filed a complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. It was claimed that the flat was locked and petitioner was in USA. Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma sought a direction to the MTNL, not to disconnect the telephone and to charge him on the basis of the average calls made during the last 2 years prior to April 1994. Respondent MTNL filed its written statement and claimed that after investigation by the Vigilance Department, it was found that there was no misuse or diversion of the lines and calls had been made from the petitioner's telephone by using the STD/ISD. It was also brought out that calls had been made utilising the AT & T service available at number 000117, wherein the billing to the subscriber was only Rs.1/- and the call charges were paid by the person called in USA. Respondents also furnished the details/statement of the calls made. The District Consumer Forum in its detailed Judgement dated 9.12.1997 dismissed the complaint. It reached the conclusion that it could not be said that calls were not made by the complainant Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma or from somebody else from his house. It was also brought out that the telephone had the facility of STD dynamic locking and the subscriber could have availed of the same. Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma has preferred an appeal before the State Commission, in which notice had been issued and the appeal is pending consideration. Telephone No.5599211 has since been disconnected for non-payment of the dues claimed. Petitioner Mr.Sharad Vats, who was at the relevant time employed with the Indian Navy as a Lieutenant, assails the impugned notice dated 21.5.1998 Annexure-P.1, by which the respondents sought to disconnect his telephone No.5543391, on account of the alleged dues of his father Lt.Col.S.M.Sharma in respect of telephone No.5599211.