Order-14.

Date-28/09/2015.

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant is a senior citizen aged about 74 years by filing this complaint alleged that he had a BSNL telephone line under the Plan       BBG CNT Combo 500 and he was enjoying the same.

          On receipt of the bill No.142363257 dated 09-11-2014 for the period from 01-10-2014 to 31-10-2014 in the last week of November, 2014 complainant came to know that his BBG CNT Combo 500 Plan has been changed to BBG FM Combo 500 Plan with effect from 01-07-2014 arbitrarily without giving any prior intimation to the complainant.  It is also stated that for BBG FM Combo 500 Plan complainant paid annual advance payment of Rs.6,226/- on 26-05-2014 for the period from 01-04-2014 to 31-03-2015 vide their bill No.131475796 dated 09-05-2014.

          Particulars of both the plans are as follows :

Particulars                             BBG FN Combo 500        BBG CNT Combo 500

Band with                               upto 2 Mbps                 Upto 2 Mbps Rs.0.30

Day Download/Upload                   1.5 GB(Free)                per MB (Day Usage

Limit (from 8.00 A.M. to                                               Charge)

2.00 A.M.)

Night Usage                             Unlimited                    Rs.0.15 per MB

(2.00 to 8.00 hrs)                                                                 (Night Usage Charge)

          Finding no other alternative at that moment complainant paid Rs.600/- on 28-11-2014 as he was compelled to took a decision for broadband plan change to the plan BBG HOME Combo UL-675 from his existing Plan BBG CNT Combo 500 Plan with effect from 01-12-2014.  Accordingly a letter dated 28-11-20143 was submitted by the complainant. 

          But the bill dated 09-11-2014 do not indicate anything about adjustment of the advance payment already made as state above so complainant sent a letter dated 02-12-2014 to the Accounts Officer T.R. North, BSNL Calcutta for clarification but no response has received till date but as per provision at least Rs.500/- against the month of October, 2014 is required to be adjusted while raising the said bill.

          On receipt of the bill No.144223452 dated 09-12-2014 for the period from 01-11-2014 to 30-11-2014 in the last week of December, 2014 noticed several anomalies i.e. no correction of his name as requested earlier, bill states there is a BB Fixed Annual Charge (under the Head) and Bill Plan BBG CNT Combo 500 Plan of Rs.7,425/- for the period from 29-1-2014 to 28-11-2014 as per broadband plan change dated 28-11-2014 it should have been under the head BB Home Combo UL-675 Plan and that to with effect from 01-12-2014.  Further the said bill does not seeking any adjustment of advance payment already made under the plan BBG FM Combo 500 Plan towards the month of November, 2014 for Rs.500/- and for which complainant prayed for correcting the bill and issue a fresh bill with proper correction but OP did not respond and did not care to attend the consumer.

          Ultimately, on 18-01-2015 all on a sudden without giving any intimation broadband services had been withdrawn by the Cossipore Exchange, BSNL Calcutta Telephone might be on the plea of non-payment of the said disputed bill for the period from 01-11-2014 to 30-11-2014 but it is completely for the laches, negligence and deceitful manner of trade on the part of the OPs and by that means complainant has been harassed humility and mentally tortured by the OPs under the above circumstances complainant has prayed before the Forum for disconnection of the broadband services permanently and to settle the account treating the disconnection of the broadband service permanently on and from 08-01-2015 and settle the accounts as due for the period from 01-12-2014 to 18-01-2015 in consideration of monthly payment and for other relief.

          On the other hand, OP by filing written statement the entire complaint is false and fabricated and it is came under the purview of The Indian Telegraph Act, 1985 as there was arbitration for settling the dispute.  Further it is mentioned that Plan BBG Combo 500 centrally has been revised into BBG FM Combo 500 Plan as per departmental policy vide circular No.1-1/2014/R&C(CFA) dated 3/6/14.  That change was published in paper Pratidin dated 06-06-2014, Bartaman dated 08-07-2014, The Statesman dated07-07-2014 and Dainik Vishwa Mitra dated 06-07-2014.  Both plans are of same amount so no question of adjustment of Rs.500/-, however, the concerned officers requested the complainant to meet in respect of the service after name correction.  It is specifically stated that the bill dated 09-02-2015 will speak that the name has been properly corrected.  Further it is submitted that as per request of the complainant BBG Home Combo unlimited 675 changed with effect from 29-11-2014 and plan BBG CNT Combo 500 Plan was revised or changed as per order of the authority.

          After all adjustment of the existing plan that is BBG CNT Combo 500 Plan to Home Combo Plan unlimited subsequently bill was raised amount to Rs.9,882/- and due date was 30-10-2012 but after relaxation the complainant did not pay the amount which was raised by the department so automatically outgoing bar was imposed as per system on and from 18-01-2015 by CDR System of BSNL.  So, there is no laches on the part of the OPs and in fact for non-payment of outstanding bills and CDR system without payment of outstanding bill for the aforesaid reason subscriber application for surrender did not processed by the department it was also informed to the complainant by letter dated 30-03-2015 but said letter was received by the complainant on the same date.  Besides, all these allegations are false and fabricated and for which the entire compliant should be dismissed when the complaint is baseless.

Decision with Reasons

Practically complainant personally argued before this Forum what was heard by the Ld. Lawyer for the OP and also by this Forum and after considering the argument as advanced by the complainant and OP’s Ld. Lawyer along with complaint and the written version including the documents we find that no doubt complainant deposited a sum of Rs.6,226/- for the first plan BBG FM Combo 500 for the period from 01-04-2014 to 31-05-2015 and that payment was made vide bill No.131475796 dated 09-05-2014.  No doubt from 01-04-2014 to 30-11-2014 complainant enjoyed the plan and per month payment was only Rs.500/- so, no doubt OP can deduct Rs.4,000/- out of Rs.6,226/- the advance payment made by the complainant for that period and after 30-01-2014 but the balance amount is lying with the OPs that is Rs.2,226/-.  Fact remains complainant on 28-11-2014 applied for change of his BBG FM Combo 500 Plan to BBG Home Combo UL-675 for annual payment subject to adjustment of existing plan with effect from 01-12-2014.  But most interesting factor is that complainant received a bill No.144223452 dated 09-12-2014 for the period from 01-11-2014 to 30-11-2014 but from the body of the bill it is found that the starting date is noted on 29-11-2014, whereas ending date is noted 01-04-2015 but plan is not noted and most interesting factor is that charges is noted Rs.7,425/-,  usage charges is noted 2,916-51, one time charges is noted Rs.674/- and discounts Rs.293/-, service tax Rs.1,241-99, late fee 0-00 and total charges Rs.11,965-44 but how this bill was raised has not been explained by the OPs.  At the time of advancement of the argument or in the written version or by submitting any separate written version also.

          In this regard Lawyer of the OP submitted that along with bill the annexure page will speak about that but after proper scrutiny and giving the anxious thought to realize the details of the bill we have failed to understand.  When that is the position then how the customer, the present consumer shall have to realize the meaning of the bill but what we have gathered that the bill was issued for BBG CNT Combo 500.  There was no scope on the part of the OP to issue such a bill without informing the complainant about change.  Most interesting factor is that about change of plan no letter was sent to the complainant, not to each consumers and it is settled principle of law change of plan must be reported well in advance prior to preparing the bill that has not been done.  So, we do not rely upon such bill and it has become the practice of OP to say that it is a computerized internet system bill so they have nothing to do and in this regard our answer is that if their internet system is such then return to their old process of handwriting and typing bill.

          But after overall evaluation and considering the entire materials we have gathered that complainant also a deposited a sum of Rs.2,250/- and in the mean time from 01-12-2014 to 01-11-2015 if as per complainant’s prayer Home Combo Plan was introduced in that case monthly rate was Rs.675/- and in that case advance deposit would be Rs.8,100/- from 01-12-2014 to 01-11-2015.  But in the meantime on 18-01-2015 the broadband connection has been withdrawn.  Land connection has been disconnected but complainant paid the bill dated 30-11-2014.  Thereafter, it was continued for 1 month and 18 days i.e. total full 2 months and in respect of 2 months per month Rs.675/- is deducted then figure would be Rs.1,350/- if that Rs.1,350/- is deducted from already deposited amount of Rs.6,226/- and after deduction of Rs.4,000/- the figure shall be Rs.876/- but peculiarities are that bill amount is high more than that of it but that has not been explained.

          No doubt when the situation is found beyond the control of BSNL, BSNL have their tactics to send their letter to the customer for settlement and each and every customer knows if he appears before that Account Officer what would be his fate – either he shall be harassed or ultimately he shall be reported that 10 percent is deducted and balance shall be deposited otherwise the connection shall be disconnected.  So, all customers know very well that what is the ultimate redressal given by the BSNL, that is nothing, but to disconnect the line.  In the present case, similar incident happened.  Complainant did not attend being disgusted about the behaviour, service rendered by the OPs and final result of disconnection was made on 18-01-2015 because disconnection instrument are in their hand and they are disconnecting for which in the meantime out of 2 crores of landlines the number of landline has been decreased to the extent of one crore and odd all over India and reason is that from so call perfect and prompt service rendered by the BSNL.  No doubt BSNL is advertising daily about special benefits at night hours for calls, sms etc. but question is who shall have to enjoy it if this connection is denied.  This is the position of the BSNL and in this regard this Forum has passed so many judgment criticizing the overact of BSNL and ultimately in some walls of the BSNL office a painting is displayed to that effect “BSNL factors public” if it is fact then what is the cause for not enjoying the landline of the customers at large.  In this context in one occasion the President of this Forum talked with the topmost higher authority who really expressed that failures of the technical staff are the cause for surrendering the landlines by the customers and that topmost officers also admitted that the technicians are not attending the consumers against fault even after filing of the complaint about defect or death position of the landline and other matters.  The above factor is also admitted by the Ministry of Telecommunication very recently which is published in the several daily newspaper that means work culture of the BSNL is so poor that even a poor customer cannot enjoy their poor service.  Most interesting factor is that this complainant as a customer already paid advance payment and in lieu of that he already got advance disconnection from the BSNL.  So, advancement of BSNL administration and progress of their working responsibility is well proved about advance disconnection against advance payment and ultimately we have gathered that the complainant has been harassed well by the OPs. 

          Considering the above fact and also considering the materials including the documents we are convinced before expression or the intention of the customer for surrendering the landline, the BSNL authority can guess just like a palmist that such and such customer wants to surrender the landline.  So, in advance they disconnect the line and that is the very common overact on the part of the BSNL but cannot restore the line in respect of dead lines but they can collect advance amount from the customer.   Automatically OPs can disconnect line without ascertaining any reason as they are palmists to read the palm of the customers.  How long this non-sense theorization shall be followed by the BSNL, this Forum does not know, not even crores of customers know.  Whatever it may be there is no necessity to express more about the BSNL because people are disgusted Central Tele-Communication Department is also disgusted TRAI has advised the BSNL institution to take such effort to reach the mind of the customers so that landlines may be restored and foe that purpose many type of avenues are being offered at free of cost but those who have their landline they know very well that same are generally published in the newspaper or publication but it is not available from the BSNL.  Already this Forum has expressed that BSNL means Bharat Sanchar – a National Liability and that is proved again in this case.

          In the light of the above observation and also considering the entire fact we find even after we deduct the above amount that Rs.4,000/- for the period of 01-04-2014 to 30-01-2014 and Rs.675/- for two months that is Rs.1,350/- from the date of 01-12-2014 to 18-01-2015 then it is found out of total deposit of Rs.6,226/- till now Rs.864/- is lying in the custody of the BSNL and out of that even a sum of Rs.500/- is deducted for service charge, taxes etc. in that case complainant is entitled to get back Rs.350/- and also security deposit amount of Rs.2250/- that means complainant is entitled to get back Rs.2,750/- from the OPs and after 18-01-2015 OPs have their own right to charge any fees against this landline and that is done month by month but disconnection had already been made on 18-01-2015 such an act is no doubt harassing, uncalled for and at the same time painful for the Ministry of Telecommunication.  This Forum has already thought that a bundle of judgments should be sent to Secretary, Ministry of Telecommunication to show performance of BSNL, West Bengal Circle but days are not far and invariably that shall be sent but before that BSNL shall have to mend their activities and try to activate their employees for restoration of all the dead landlines and to give proper redressal to all the customers with humanity because consumer right is part of human right so, humanity of employees or officers shall be shown at first.  But we have gathered that entire BSNL Institution or establishment and their employees and officers have lost their human conscience, human responsibility and their human expression in discharging their daily duties also but question is when they shall be human in their activities in future, whether on closure of BSNL or sale of the establishment.

          In the light of the above observation considering the conduct of the OP and also after proper calculation of the entire account related to the present complainant broadband line and payment etc. we are directing the OP to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- at once without any delay treated his broadband line, telephone line connection is disconnected with effect from 18-01-2015 and under any circumstances, OP shall not claim any further amount in respect of the broadband line or the telephone line from the complainant in future treating the said line disconnected and cancelled from 18-01-2015.

          In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest with a cost of Rs.2,000/- against the OPs.

          OPs are directed to refund a sum of Rs.2,750/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order along with a compensation of Rs.2,000/- for harassing such an old and aged person even he paid the entire amount in advance against the broadband line and telephone line.

          OPs are jointly and severally shall have to comply the order by clearing the decretal amount that is Rs.6,750/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order failing which for non compliance and disobeyance of the Forum’s order OPs shall have to pay penal damages of Rs.100/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree and if it is collected it shall be deposited to this Forum.

OPs are directed to comply the order within one month from the date of this order and even if it is found that OPs are reluctant to comply the order in that case penal action u/s.25 read with Section 27 of the C.P. Act shall be started against them for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed.