TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER HISSAR Vs. DEV RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN both these Revision Petitions the challenge is against the order dated 30th September, 1992 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh by which the appeals filed by the Telecom District Manager, Hissar and the Complainant Shri Dev Raj against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hissar have been dismissed.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that Shri Dev Raj, Advocate who is the Petitioner in Revision Petition No. 6 of 1993 and Respondent in revision Petition No. 564 of 1992, had filed a complaint before the aforesaid District Forum on the ground that the Telecom District Manager, Hissar, who is the Petitioner in Revision Petition No. 564 of 1992 and Respondent in Revision Petition No. 6 of 1993 was legally bound to publish the telephone directory annually between the months of June and September. However, the 1st directory was published by the Department in 1987 stating on its 1st page 'corrected upto January, 1987'. The issue of the directory was of 1986. No directory, addenda or corrigendum has been published thereafter and thus the said directory is practically of no use as during the last four years, more than nearly a thousand telephone numbers had been changed in the area due to disconnection of STD facility or on technical grounds and more than 2000 new telephone connections have been provided. It was further alleged that because of the non-publication of directory the complainant who is a subscriber of a telephone and indeed all the subscribers in the area were facing untold inconvenience, physical and mental harassment and financial loss in locating the number they wish to dial. It was pointed out that the enquiry number 197 is a metered number and as such calls made thereto for enquiry were chargeable and added to the subscriber's bill. Moreover the service of this number was not available for all the 24 hours and apart from that even during the relevant hours the same remains unattended and invariably there was little or no response therefrom.

(3.) THE District Forum came to the opinion that by not publishing the directory, clearly the Department was depriving the subscribers of a lawful right and a valuable facility. It, therefore, ordered payment of Rs. 400/- as compensation to the claimant plus Rs. 100/- per years for not releasing the Telephone directory.