.......... ..7.. Mg IN THE HIGH COURT 9F JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR ( ARI-I); 0W”w/i WRIT PETITION No. '/2ooo PETITIONERS: 1. Smt. Rajani Katela wife of B.L.Katela, aged about 54 yrs; resident of civil Linés, Raipur (Chhattisga rh) : ..... 2. Praveen Kumar Katela son of B.L. Katela aged about 28 years: reSident of Civiknines, Raipur: j (Chhattisgarh) : L Versus w .. , , / ‘ RESPONDENTS: J 1. Union of India, through .Secretal‘w, Telecommunication Department, NEW DELHI. j 2. General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Telephone Exchange Building, G.E. Road. Raipur (Chhattisgarh); 3. Commercial Officer, g Bharat sanchar Nigam Limited, E UJa‘ri ;st»a‘mb1ia Chow-kg}? ‘ ’ "k ‘ E Raipur (Chhattisgarh); ‘é. Divisional Engineer, Telephones, g. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,‘ E Telephone Exchange Building. K G.E. Road, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTS;226(227 OF THE CONSTITUTIDN OF INDIA. Particulars of the Eetitioners: As detailed above in cause title. v Particulars of the ResEond‘ents: As detailed above in the cause title. “2. é 2 § g S E é r K V a XI-HC-ZZ *g‘ ‘ . .w 2510612003 Shri Bhaskar Payashi, counsel for the petitioners. appears on behalf of Shri AS. ‘ Shri U.N.S‘Deo, Advocate Central GOVt. Standing (huneel for’gUnion of wehaxwar, Sn india/ respondent no. 1. None for respondents 110.2.3 and 4 though sewed. iiled for quashing the order] This petition has been communication of disconnection ‘Annexures PI3 & ‘P/4 dated 20/11/2000 whereby the telephone connections bearing no. 429595 and 23361? of the Fmfher prayer is for a dirtcti commotions. It is the contention of telephone connections have Ix notice or Withoutaccording to th hearing, the orders are void and Duribg the course of argur dents, it is stated by the’learhed counsel for the petitioners that as in the meantime the I petitioners have obtained a tele] ,k petitioners Were disconnected. D11 for restoration of the said the petitioner that since the zen diseo'nnected without any a petitioners, any opportunity of liable to be set aside. )hone connection from another "Mew mm L m m mwmm mwitwm és‘wm Network, they do not press this ‘ (mashing of the ordar and 1 connections. However, they conf1 the socurity doposit which thoy submitted that as the disconnect; payment of dues w more shouh 6f the reSpondexlfs in refunding t1 1e deposit. Having heaid léalnsd cour withra direcu'oh to the responde emd refund The secun‘ty amount 1 the petitioners move a suitable a} is further dimcted that the ‘1 rgapplication Within a period of} ‘which itvis submitted to the Apprl With the aforesaid observ: petin'on stands disposed of Consequently, M.W.P.No. 12/2000 /_/_iw also stand disposed of. x Sd/— P.C.Naik ‘r l ’hezm vrit petition with mgai‘d to the ‘estoration of the telephoxie ne their prayer for a refttnd of had deposited. It jg'further on was. not on account of non- l be no impediment 011 the pelt set, the petition. is disposed of ms no.2, 3 ahd 4 to cohstder EO the petitioners as per rules if lplication for refund thereof. VI-t ‘espondents I shall decidewthe :ight Weeks from the date on )priate éuthority. itions and directions, thiskwrit # .