SBCWP NO.7187/06. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7187/2006. Sub Divisional Engineer and another Vs. Mukhram and another Date of order:- 21/02/2008. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri B.N. Sandu for the petitioners. BY THE COURT:- This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9/12/2005. Apart from the merit of the case, contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that on the complaint filed by respondent No.1, permanent lok adalat has directed that amount of Rs.4000/- be paid to the respondent No.1 on the ground that his STD/PCO telephone booth was illegally disconnected. It was contended that alleged basis for which telephone connection was discontinued was that complainant failed to make payment of Rs.234/- which was outstanding against the respondent No.1 towards the petitioner. The fact SBCWP NO.7187/06. 2 however was that amount was already deposited. STD/PCO telephone booth for this reason remained discontinued for a period w.e.f. 13/3/2005 to the end of August, 2005. The learned permanent lok adalat upon consideration of the matter found that dues have already been deposited by the complainant on 7/3/2005 and that fact could not be disputed by the petitioner. The learned permanent lok adalat therefore while allowing the petition of the respondent No.1 directed the petitioners to make payment of Rs.4000/- as compensation. Learned permanent lok adalat further directed that enquiry be held to fix the liability of S.D.O. till the time and this amount shall be realized from Sub Divisional Engineer BSNL Nawalgarh. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that even if it is accepted that the permanent lok adalat can award compensation, it could not direct amount to be realized from Sub Divisional Engineer BSNL Nawalgarh. The issue whether as to who was responsible for the negligence is yet to be determined in the enquiry that has been directed to be held. Learned permanent lok adalat could not itself held the Sub Divisional Engineer BSNL Nawalgarh responsible. This should have been left to the department to hold an enquiry and determine the responsibility. SBCWP NO.7187/06. 3 Having regard to the facts of the case, I do not find any good reason to interfere with the order of the learned permanent lok adalat to the extent of awarding compensation to the respondent No.1. However, that part of the direction given by the learned permanent lok adalat that amount of compensation be recovered from Sub Divisional Engineer BSNL Nawalgarh fixing its liability at its own, cannot be sustained. While therefore not interfering with the impugned order in so far as award of compensation, it is modified in the terms that petitioners would be at liberty to recover the aforesaid amount after holding an enquiry from the person/officer whose responsibility is fixed in such enquiry. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil