RAMESH KUMAR KHURANA Vs. G M TELEPHONE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the amount of payment of telephone charges pertaining to Telephone No. 556618 of which the petitioner is the subscriber. The complaint of the petitioner is that there is excess billing and even though complaint has been lodged on 20-2-1992 to the General Manager, Telephones, Hyderabad, no action has been taken and no proper enquiry has been conducted in accordance with law. The learned Single Judge while admitting the writ petition has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-, towards arrears of telephone bills. Aggrieved by the said interlocutory order, writ appeal (W. A.No.572 of 1992) has been filed contending that the said imposition is onerous.

(2.) This Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is not the fact finding court so as to make roving enquiry into the correctness of the billing etc. To record a finding on the contentions involved, oral testimony is necessary. The oral testimony involves examination-in-chief, cross-examination as also reexamination of the witnesses both on behalf of the petitioner as also on behalf of the Central Government (Telephone Department). It is also pertinent to mention that the Civil Suit is barred in view of the express provisions contained in the Indian Telegraph Act, 1890. Instead, Section 7-B of the said Act contemplated arbitration whenever a dispute of this kind is raised. As such, arbitration proceedings contemplated under the said provision are only the proper remedy.

(3.) On hearing Counsel on either side and considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the following order is passed on this petition: