SAFARI INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by disconnection of her Telephone No. 503901, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(2.) THE respondents have filed counter affidavit and the petitioner has filed the rejoinder affidavit in reply thereto. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) THE submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that for nonpayment of dues of another telephone belonging to her husband the petitioner's telephone could not have been disconnected, and in support of the said submission reliance is placed on a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Union of India v. Sarda Colour Lab 1997 (2) PLJR 652, as well as decision in the cases of Santokh Singh v. Divisional Engineer Telephones, Shillong and Ors. AIR 1990 Gauhati 47 and V. Pridhvi Kumar v. The General Manager, Telecom District, Hyderabad : AIR1993AP131 . In the above cases it has been laid down that a telephone cannot be disconnected merely because there are outstanding dues against another telephones number belonging to the same or another subscriber.