(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 1128 OF 1994 M/s. Sarda Enterprises, M.G. Road, Ahmednagar, through its Proprietor, Ramesh Bansilal Sarda. .. Petitioner. versus 1. Union of India, through its Secretary, Department of Telecommunications, New Delhi. 2. The District Telecom Engineer, Ahmednagar. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. A.V. Patil, Advocate, holding for Mr. A.S. Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General, for respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 served (Absent). ........................ (2) CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 7TH JUNE 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for a declaration that the action of the respondents in disconnecting telephone no. 23301 of the petitioner for non-payment of dues of telephone no. 23765, is illegal. The petitioner has also claimed to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- from the respondents. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner, that the disconnection of his telephone connection was with mala fide intention to recover the excess bill. 3. It is settled law, that the mala fides can only be against a particular person and not against a particular office. No allegations of any nature against a particular officer of respondent no.1 have either been made in the petition or such a officer has been joined as party respondent. In that view of the matter, we do not find merit in the contention of mala fides. 4. In so far as claim for compensation is concerned, the same cannot be adjudicated in the extraordinary writ jurisdiction (3) without there being any material on record to substantiate the claim. 5. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference. The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp1128