1H TEE“ m6&1"mm‘0F“WYA 'PRADE&! ATV JABAL?UR V, writ: mtitiim (;&mtmn§lPmbi:bnion/ Geniorui/ Qwtamrxmt.) Na. of _ 1995 make“: ELF. & Mm, a miiorad ”mum tint ”mam mam: $u Hanandza Kmax sun ef Lam Qn myalal. carryiug an its Mann at Malviya mad Raiput, fah£1 a¢ maritt Raipnr. M.P. ..?EIITIwE .R VERSJS / 1. mica of India. thrmsh the Secretary mun Mini sczy of tolummication, ralecm ms$on Sacha $awm Asheko mad. New Bolbi-1mn “auger, aari KN.u.?. Gaul. dwlc. me duet 1" «on Gena-a1 mm s§m, map“. . “hwhma mstnct ¢ nmaga: st $59”. 9/0 mpu: Auk acumg x mpur. Iah£L and us$ct had, mPw’ “0?. ¢§§ggs affxc ifmi‘nffict mm: of 6.5. wad. mpur, Tah£l md mstnat, Baiput, 3.1% m v n3. “EgnmTs .4 Mr. BP. Sharma, counse for The pe‘ri‘rioner‘. Mr. Raghavéndm PmdhFn, Cam-mi Governmenf Counsel for The respondenfs. ’ Heard bofh fhe counsel. By ‘the insfan'r wr-i'r pefifion under- Arficles 226 & 227 of “the Cons’ri‘ru-i‘ion of india, The pe‘rifioner has quesfioned The propriefy of no‘rice dafed 14-12—11994 (Annexure P~1), whereby The pefifioner has been asked fa deposi‘r The securi’ry amoun‘r of Rs.30,DOO/—, againsf Telephone connec‘i'ion No.5344 36. Learned counsel for The pe‘li‘rioner‘s submi‘l' Thu? if is True ThaT The bill of The peTiTioner is arouid abouf Rs.10,000/— per monTh, buT The peTiTioner is regularly depo$i“ing The amount Therefore, There was no ground for The respondenfs To enhance The securiTy deposiT wiThouT hearing The peTiTioner. Learned counsel relied upon The decision of KarnaTaka High CourT in The maTTer of K. Channappa and oThers vs. The Union of Indie and oThers reporTed in AIR 1991 Karna‘raka 18, wherein The CourT held TlaT before issuance of The noTice of enhancemenT in The facTs and circumsTances of The case, The Telephone auThoriTies oughT To have givenopporTuniTy of hearing To The peTiTionersa In view of The above order and looking To The facTs and circumsTances of The presenT case, The peTiTioner is direcTed To make a XI—HC-22 Wm m 3mm fir-mm EWW mmw WW W®ER §7af§rdwm 9-8-2005 Séma represenm‘rion “(o responden’r No.3 raising a“ his poin'rs wifhin a period I furn, responden'i’ No.3 shuli decide The manner afier considering The poin‘is rdance wifh law. Till fhe represenfm‘ion z responden‘rs should no‘r insisi‘ upon fhve r fhe nofice. n‘ion and direcfions, The wri‘r pe‘iifion of four weeks from Today and it represen‘rafion in an objecfive raised by The pe‘rifioner, in acco of fhe pefi‘h’oner is decided fhe deposit of securii'y amoum’ as pe WiTh fhe above observc s’rands disposed of. i Porfies ore en’ri‘ried for ce r'ri‘fied copy of fhis order. ‘ Sdl- l r L.C.BHAD°° l Judge , (qiéél‘an) XI-Hc—22 Emma, Wan—qr, W3? 60 ‘WW wf-Rgg f1? 29m m mm mam WW mmmw § z“ wwwafrwm é€mm