HMT LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, challenge is to communication dated 22.10.1997 and 29.10.1997 vide which petitioner has been informed by respondents No. 12 and 7 respectively that all telephone connections working in its organisation from Chandigarh/Panchkula exchange shall stand transferred to H.M.T. Pinjore Exchange w.e.f. 1.11.1997 due to area demarcation. In addition to the quashing of communications dated 22.10.1997 and 29.10.1997, petitioner is also seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to restore telephone connections from Pinjore Exchange back to Chan-digarh/Panchkula Exchanges.

(2.) Petitioner is a company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956, owned, controlled and run by the Central Government. It has one of its units at Pinjore, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula, Petitioner-unit came into existence in 1960-61 and is situate near the Pinjore Garden, i.e. about 21 kms. away from the township of Chandigarh. Petitioner has averred that vide letter dated 13.11.1961, Director General, Posts and Telegraphs sanctioned the provisions of a long distance connection at the factory site of the petitioner on out of turn basis. Petitioner was to give ten years' guarantee to retain the telephone connection. Petitioner has averred that the telephone cable was specially laid by the Telephone Department, Chandigarh right from Sector 17 Telephone Exchange, Chandigarh to H.M.T. Limited, Pinjore, consisting of 20 pairs (pair means a pair of two wires-conductors for each telephone connection). Out of the 20 pairs, 16 pairs were gradually given to H.M.T Limited, Pinjore. Four pairs were reserved for being made available to the petitioner in the event of emergency of some pairs going out of order. Petitioner has averred that in the year 1970, petitioner was only manufacturing Machine Tools and accessories at Pinjore, but in 1971, with the addition of Tractor Division, petitioner again made a request to the Telephone Department. Chandigarh, for providing additional 20 pairs of telephone lines to meet the increased demand for telephones. The Divisional Engineer (Phones), Chandigarh, vide letter dated 6.12.1997 informed the petitioner about the additional facility of telephone. Petitioner was told that for providing 15 direct telephone at H.M.T., 20/20 Lbs., cable (loaded) has to be laid to meet the transmission standard, for the distance of 21 Kms. It was stated that the provisional rent of the same cable will be Rs. 1,45,689/- per annum and the rent would be charged for the guaranteed period of ten years. After the expiry of guaranteed period of 10 years of underground cable, all the 15 telephone would be considered as Long Distant Connections and the rent would be charged as per details given in letter dated 6.12.1976. Thereafter, there was some more correspondence between the petitioner and respondents. The District Manager (Telephone). Chandigarh, vide letter dated 20.12.1985 (Annexure P-7), informed the petitioner that the case regarding laying of 20 pairs/20 Lbs. cable from the Chandigarh Telephone Exchange to H.M.T. Limited, Pinjore, has been re-examined and the charges already communicated vide letter dated 14.8.1985 (Annexure P-6) have been found correct. It was further mentioned that further action for processing the case would be taken after hearing the petitioner. Petitioner confirmed to District Manager (Telephones), Chandigarh, the acceptance of "rent and guarantee" terms as contained in letter dated 30.5.1983 (Annexure P-5), as also the revised provisional figures conveyed to the petitioner in letter dated 14.8.1985. The Assistant Engineer (M.M.) Office of the District Manager (Telephones), Chandigarh, vide letter dated 2.7.1986, informed the petitioner that as per departmental rules, the rent for the proposed 20/20 lbs. cable will be charged from the date of commissioning and the interest will not be payable on the deposit of rental cable. Ultimately, 20 pairs/290 lbs. cable (R&G) from Telephone Bhawan, Sector 17, Chandigarh, to H.M.T. Limited, Pinjore, was commissioned on 28.2.1989. The case of the petitioner is that provision of 20 pairs/20 lbs U.G. cable between Main Telephone Exchange, Sector 17, Chandigarh and H.M.T. Pinjore, which was commissioned w.e.f. 28.2.1989, was to serve the requirement of petitioner upto the year 2029 because the prevailing effective life of the cable is 40 years. Petitioner has contended that the underground cable has been laid and provided for the exclusive use of the petitioner. It is further the case of the petitioner that against the Rent and Guarantee Cable installed by the Telephone Department for the petitioner, only 8 telephone connections were in addition to the 16 telephone connections which were already working on the old cable before 28.2.1989. In April, 1997, the Telephone Department transferred out of 24 telephone connections, 18 telephone connections from the Main Telephone Exchange Sector 17, Chandigarh to Telephone Exchange, Panchkula. In the second week of October, 1997, petitioner was in-formed that telephone connections working from Chandigarh/Panchkula Telephone Exchange will be disconnected and connected to Pinjore Telephone Exchange. In this connection, notice dated 22.10.1997 was sent to the petitioner. Subsequently on 29.10.1997, petitioner was informed that telephone connections working in its organisation from Chandigarh/Panchkula Telephone Exchange are to be transferred to H.M.T. Pinjore exchange due to area demarcation, and that staff had been deputed for carrying out necessary installation work. Vide communication dated 10.11.1997, petitioner was informed that old telephone numbers working from Chandigarh/Panchkula have been transferred to H.M.T. Pinjore exchange. Petitioner was also informed about the new numbers which were laid in lieu of old telephone numbers. Petitioner has contended that on receipt of letters dated 22.10.1997 (Annexure P-16) and 29.10.1997 (Annexure P-17) to the effect that telephone connections working from Chandigarh/Panchkula exchanges will be disconnected and connected to Pinjore Exchange, petitioner made six representations to the various authorities to maintain status-quo and also to commission the remaining lines. Petitioners has contended that as a result of representations, the Chief General Manager, Telecom Punjab Circle, Punjab, Chandigarh, vide letter dated 12.11.1997 (Annexure P-26) conveyed sanction for provision of two long distance Telephone connections from Panchkula Telephone Exchange for H.M.T. Limited, Pinjore, and the said two telephone connections were out of the telephone numbers working from Panchkula to work at Pinjore. The grievance of the petitioner is that by the unilateral and arbitrary action of the respondents in disconnecting the telephone connections working with the petitioner from Chandigarh/Panchkula Exchange to H.M.T. Pinjore Exchange, the functioning of the petitioner has been adversely affected with no corresponding gain to the petitioner. Challenge to letters, Annexure P-16 and P-17 is also on the ground that vide letter dated 30.5.1983, Annexure P-5, respondents had given a firm commitment that on expiry of guarantee period of 10 years, the provisional rent of the cable will be 1 per cent of the capital cost viz. Rs.2,22,268/- per annum (subject to variation) and all the 20 telephones will be charged as long distance connections. It is contended that the respondents are estopped from unilaterally acting to the detriment of the petitioner. It is also contended that if two long distance telephone connections can function from Panchkula exchange, then there is no technical reason as to why the remaining telephone connections cannot continue to be provided to the petitioner from Chandigarh/Panchkula Exchange.

(3.) Upon notice of the petition, respondents in their written statement have stated that petitioner-company is owned, controlled and run by the Central Government and similarly, the respondents are also owned, controlled and run by the Central Government and therefore, the matters between the Public Sector Undertakings should be referred to the Committee as per directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Respondents have further stated that for enforcement of rent and guarantee agreement, remedy does not lie under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The case of the respondents is that although the rent and guarantee Cable of 20/20 Lbs was sanctioned in February, 1989, but still some telephone numbers were working on Departmental Cables of lower gauge. With the commissioning of Panchkula Telephone Exchange, some of the telephone numbers were transferred from Chandigarh Telephone Exchange to Panchkula Telephone Exchange. Still the respondents experienced difficulties in maintaining the underground cables laid between Chandigarh and H.M.T. Pinjore and to maintain proper services. Respondents have further stated that there had been a mani-fold developments in the area of route of the underground cable. As a result of these changes and widening of roads, the underground cable has been damaged at various places, as also it has come right under the middle of Panchkula-Kalka highway. It has thus, become both practically and technically impossible for the respondents to maintain the underground cable. On the commissioning of Telephone Exchange at Pinjore, within the premises of H.M.T., the respondents are within their rights to provide service to the petitioner from that exchange. It is also stated that providing of more telephone connections from Chandigarh/Panchkula Exchanges is not feasible due to administrative exigencies and the telephone connections from Pinjore Exchange have been provided only for smooth running of the department and to overcome difficulties arising to the department. In the two additional affidavits dated 16.3.1999 and 19.3.1999, respondents have stated that a latest technology telephone exchange having a capacity of 920 lines has been provided in the premises of H.M.T. for its exclusive use and no other connection has been provided to any other subscriber. It is stated that when the connections to the petitioner were released, the Chandigarh Telephone Exchange was electro mechanical exchange, whereas now the Chandigarh as well as the Pinjore Exchanges both are electronic exchanges having the same services. In additional affidavit dated 19.3.1999. respondents have stated that due to widening of road and introduction of light crossing, this underground cable has come under the metalled portion of road at different places, and as such the department is unable to maintain this cable properly.