Arvind Kumar & Ors. vs M.T.N.L. & Ors.
2000 Latest Caselaw 1001 Del

ORDER

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Rule.

With the consent of the parties the writ petition is taken up for disposal.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite his repeated entreaties the respondents failed to raise the bill for his telephone number 742-0195. Petitioner was suddenly confronted, in June 2000, with a bill for the sum of Rs. 69.064.00, which included late payment charge of Rs. 2,000/-. It is not disputed before me that the delay in billing had emanated out of the respondents' own failure to feed the necessary data in the computer. In fact, the notings on the file reveal that one of the causes for the delay was that one of the employees, who was dealing with the case, had been transferred. The situation for the petitioner further aggravated when, as per the petitioner, he met senior officials of the respondent, including the DGM (Finance), for grant of instalments. As per the petitioner, his requests were not heeded to. In these circumstances, Mr. B.D. Sharma, DGM (Finance), MTNL, was directed to be personally present.

3. Mr. B.D. Sharma is present in Court today. He has produced before the Court petitioner's request for instalments, wherein he had directed grant of five instalments. As per the respondents, this decision was conveyed to the petitioner on telephone. This does not inspire confidence, in as much as, the petitioner is unlikely to have approached the Court with this writ petition, had this decision about grant of instalments been conveyed to him. Be that as it may, this controversy need not detain us any further.

4. The desirability of attending to the grievances of the subscribers in the present day context of highly competitive business has been emphasised upon the DGM (Finance), MTNL.

5. Let petitioner pay the amount demanded by the respondents less the late payment charges and the charges towards telephone rental for the period during which the telephone remained disconnected, in six monthly instalments, commencing from 21st October, 2000. On payment of the first instalment by 21st October, 2000, petitioner's telephone number 742-0195 shall be restored. Petitioner shall also continue to pay the current charges for use of the telephone. In case petitioner defaults in payment of any two consecutive instalments of fails to pay the entire amount by 21st March, 2001, respondents shall be entitled to disconnect the telephone.

6. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions.