TELECOM URBAN SIRHIND Vs. RANJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is an appeal against the order dated 13.7.2000 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Fatehgarh Sahib (hereinafter called the District Forum ).

(2.) Admittedly the telephone of the respondent-complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) remained disconnected for the period 28.1.1998 to 1.9.1998 i. e. , for over 6 months for the non-payment of outstanding dues. After the disconnection, the appellant-opposite parties (hereinafter called the opposite parties) demanded Rs.2,040/- which were deposited by the complainant on 1.9.1998. After the clearance of all outstanding bills by the complainant she wanted the restoration of her telephone but the opposite parties refused to do so on the ground that the area had become technically non-feasible and that the telephone will be restored as and when the area becomes feasible. As has been mentioned by the District Forum by taking into consideration the evidence on the file the opposite parties had taken no steps whatsoever even after the receipt of the sanction. The area, according to the opposite parties, had become technically non-feasible after the complainant had moved an application for restoration on 8.9.1998. It was the duty of the opposite parties that after the clearance of all the outstanding bills by the complainants the telephone connection should have been restored by them immediately. If after the payment of the bills the area had become non-feasible then it was not the fault of the complainant. The opposite parties did not take any step, whatsoever, even after the receipt of the sanction for restoration of the telephone. Opposite parties have placed on record sanction eventually conveyed by the General Manager, Telephones vide order dated 26.4.2000 (Ex. R-2 ). Despite the fact that the complainant had deposited all the dues and the sanction was received by the opposite parties for restoration of the telephone, as mentioned above, the complainant had to file a complaint before the District Forum for restoration of the connection and the connection was ordered to be released only by the District Forum vide its order under challenge. In these circumstances, the order of the District Forum vide which a direction was made to the opposite parties to restore the telephone connection of the complainant without charging any rental for the intervening period is flawless and is not illegal in any manner whatsoever. In these circumstances, we dismiss this appeal with costs. which are quantified at Rs.1,000/-. Appeal dismissed.