Adv.Tanna for appellant BSNL Co. Respondent absent. BSNL Co.has filed this appeal against the judgment and award passed by D.F. Chandrapur in CC 86/05 decided on 24/11/2005. While allowing the complaint filed by the complainant/Respondent herein, the Forum below directed the appellant BSNL to pay compensation of Rs.5000/-. towards physical harassment and also to pay Rs.1000/- towards cost. The forum below also gave certain other directives which we are not concerned with in this appeal. Aggrieved by the award of compensation and cost the original opposite party has filed this appeal. Facts to the extent material for deciding this case may be stated as under…

            The complainant, who is a resident of Sarkarnagar Chandrapur was having post paid mobile connection of BSNL bearing No. 422135337 and also a land line connection of BSNL Co. bearing No.274986.  According to the complainant, he had paid all the bills up to date, but on 20/5/2007, all of a sudden, he received a letter from BSNL Co. directing him to immediately pay Rs.17020/- in respect of mobile connections post paid bill on or before 19/5/05, else, his land line connection would be discontinued. Thereafter firstly outgoing facility and then total landline connection was disconnected, the complainant filed consumer complaint praying for immediate restoration of his landline connection and also payment of Rs.20000/- towards cost and compensation for the inconvenience caused.

            The Appellant/Opposite party filed written statement and contested the complaint. According to Appellant, complainant had a mobile connection and he was in arrears of Rs.17,022/- in respect of that connection. He was issued letters in this regard, but he did not pay the arrears. Therefore, after due intimation to the complainant, his landline connection was discontinued on 27/7/05 under Rule 443 of Indian Telegraph Rules. The Appellant, in its written statement, justified the disconnection of land line for non payment of mobile bill. Appellant pleaded that they are not deficient in service and complaint should be dismissed.

            On the basis of affidavits and documents placed on record and after discussing a lot of judgments, the forum below held that BSNL was guilty of deficiency in service in as much as for non payment of mobile post paid bill, BSNL has discontinued land line connection though in respect of said land line connection complainant was not in arrears. We agree with the finding recorded by the District Forum. Mobile connection stands on different footing than a land line connection. Rule 443 of Indian Telegraph Rules would be applicable if the complainant has more than one land line connections in one premises and he fails to pay dues in respect of any of them, in such circumstances, BSNL Co. is empowered to discontinue other land line connection/s for which he has paid the bills. But, in this case, the complainant was in arrears of post paid mobile bill and the BSNL had no authority to discontinue his land line connection for said arrears of post paid mobile connection as has been rightly held by the District Consumer Forum. In these circumstances, the award passed by the District Forum appears to be justified and we are not inclined to interfere with the same. Appeal is devoid of merits and as such liable to be dismissed. Hence the order…

                                                            ORDER