Petitioner challenged massive broadband bills and service disconnection by BSNL. Court observed parties' readiness to settle and disposed of petition allowing payment in instalments.
Petitioner permitted to pay outstanding bill in five equal monthly instalments starting 02.03.2015; entire sum recoverable on default.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/21ST MAGHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 10298 of 2013 (J)
PETITIONER(S):
--------------
G.BABY, SARADA SADANAM, ADINADU NORTH.P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 542. BY ADVS.SRI.K.BABU RAJAN SRI.DIPU R. SRI.K.JALADHARAN SRI.T.A.SREE KUMAR.
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE DISTRICT TELECOM GENERAL MANAGER, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, B.S.N.L. BHAVAN, KOLLAM-691 001.
2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, OCHIRA, KOLLAM. 690 526.
3. THE JUNIOR TELECOM OFFICER, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, CLAPPANA, KOLLAM. 690 525.
BY SMT.E.V.MOLY, SC, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED BY SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP, SC, BSNL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rvs.
WP(C).No. 10298 of 2013 (J)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
------------------------
EXT. P1- TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 2.2.2013.
EXT. P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.2.2013 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT. P3- TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DATED 18.2.2013. EXT. P4- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION/LETTER DATED 7.3.2013. EXT. P5- TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 2.3.2013.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
------------------------
NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE RVS.
P.A.TO JUDGE
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
W.P.(C) No. 10298 of 2013
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner was running an STD PCO cum Internet Cafe (Broad Band Connection) bearing No.04762895929 from February 2010. At the inception of the connection, the plan allotted was 750/- per month; and the said₹ scheme was available till December, 2010 only. According to the petitioner, the said plan enabled such users as the petitioner assessed the monthly use and the amount for the services availed by loging on to the BSNL web site (i.e., self care portal). The petitioner alleges that from January 2011, the petitioner changed the plan as per instructions, which provided only for two plans, i.e., plan of 400/- (i.e.,₹ the Broad Band Free use limit up to 4 GB only) and 1,000/-₹ (in the Broad Band use limit up to 10 GB). The petitioner opted for 400/- plan since he had been using the Broad₹ Band below 3 GB for all the past months. The petitioner alleges that with the change in plan, the respondents
..2..
W.P.(C) No. 10298 of 2013
stopped issuing telephone and Broad Band bills. The BSNL self care portal was not activated, as a result of which, the users were left in dark about their total usage; it is alleged. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made a representation to issue bills; and the respondents started issuing telephone bills only. As bills for Broad Band usage have not been issued, the petitioner approached the respondents demanding for the same. Later, from December, 2012 onwards, the BSNL self portal started functioning. The petitioner alleges that to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, the BSNL portal showed an unsettled bill of 28,197.57/- against the petitioner's Broad₹ Band use. Again, the portal showed the Broad Band Bill at ₹28,735/- for the period from 01.01.2013 to 23.01.2013; and further on 24.01.2013, the unsettled bill is shown as ₹ 41,968/-, which is marked as Ext.P1. According to the petitioner, he was at a loss to understand as to how such huge amount for the permitted maximum free use of 4 GB could have been computed for the said months as he was not using more than 3 GB in any month. The amount, in
..3..
W.P.(C) No. 10298 of 2013
any case, would not be more than 10,800/- as per the plan₹ for the said entire period; according to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 representation before the 3rd respondent. In the meanwhile, the petitioner paid the then current amount as evidenced by Ext.P3. The petitioner's grievance is that while Ext.P2 was pending, without any notice, the respondents disconnected his telephone connection on 28.02.2013. The petitioner further alleges that though the petitioner's case was taken up vide Ext.P4 by the Taluk Consumer Protection Council, the respondents, without restoring connection and without considering Exts.P2 and P4, issued another bill for an amount of ₹27,905/- (Ext.P5) for the period from 01.02.2013 to 28.02.2013 to the petitioner. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.
W.P.(C) No. 10298 of 2013
..4..
with him.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to pay off the outstanding amount as on today in five equal monthly instalments starting from 02.03.2015. If the petitioner fails in remitting one instalment, it shall be open to the respondents to realize the entire sum without providing further time for payment.
Sd/-
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE
bka/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to discharge the petitioner's writ petition regarding disputed broadband billing and service disconnection.
Whether to permit payment of the outstanding bill in instalments pending the consumers forum outcome.
G.Baby
Sarada Sadanam
The District Telecom General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigma Limited
The Sub Divisional Engineer, Bharat Sanchar Nigma Limited
The Junior Telecom Officer, Bharat Sanchar Nigma Limited
A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
