UNION OF INDIA Vs. AMAN DAHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are two cross-appeals against the order dated 17th March, 1992 of the State Commission, Haryana, Chandigarh. They are disposed of by one order hereunder.

(2.) THE relevant facts briefly are that the appellant-complainant in Appeal No.191 of 1992 was residing in Sector 11, Panchkula, Haryana. In October 1989, he was sanctioned a telephone connection on out of turn priority basis. The installation of the telephone was subject to technical feasibility.

(3.) ACCORDING , to the appellant-complainant in January 1990, if not earlier, he had decided to contest the Bar Council Elections which were scheduled to be held in October, 1990. According to the appellant he had conveyed this to the District Manager Telephones whom he met in January, 1990 for early connection in Sector 11. As he needed a telephone to be able to contest the elections to the Bar Council, he had shifted his residence from Sector 11 to Sector 16 in March, 1990 when he had to pay a considerably higher rent. As from March 1990 onwards he was residing in a technically feasible area, he legitimately expected that the telephone connection would be installed without further delay, he having been sanctioned connection by the Competent Authority on out of turn priority basis. However, the Telephone Department took more than one year to provide telephone connection in the new feasible area in Sector 16. Some persons below him in the seniority list for grant of telephone connections were given telephone before he was given the same in March, 1991. Thus, the Telephone Department ignored his seniority to the out of turn priority category telephone. This according to the appellant-complainant constituted deficiency in the rendering of service.