IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.367 of 2008 S.RAFI AHMAD, S/O Late Dr. S. Wasi Ahmad, resident of Bibiganj, Danapur, P.S. Danapur, District- Patna. ………….. Petitioner. Versus 1. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, through Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Patna. 2. Principal General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bihar Circle, Patna. 3. Deputy General Manager(TRI) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Patna. 4. Director (Finance), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Patna. 5. Senior Accounts Officer, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Patna. ……………Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioner: - Mr. Dev Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For the Respondents:- J.P. Karan, Sr. Advocate. 3 15.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents-Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and its authorities. 2. This petition has been filed for directing the respondents to furnish a detail of the amount of rebate given to the petitioner in pursuance of the settlement arrived at between the Principal General (Telecom), District: Patna and the petitioner incorporated in letter No. PGMTD/Legal/MJC-2001/17, dated 6.7.2004 (annexure-2) as per order dated 26.6.2001 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 6481 of 2001 and also to direct the respondent authorities to refund the said amount to the petitioner, and/or, adjust the 2 same against the outstanding dues, if any. 3. It transpires that earlier the petitioner had filed C.W.J.C. No. 6841 of 2001 claiming that Telephone No. 427179 was installed in the house of the petitioner in the year 1992, but subsequently there was excess billing so far as local calls were concerned and the petitioner filed a complaint before the appropriate authority on 3.4.2001. However, instead of rectifying the defects the next bill was served on the petitioner with enhanced amount and hence another complaint was filed on 13.6.2000. As no remedial action was taken by the authorities in spite of the fact that the petitioner personally met the Principal General Manager, Telecom, Patna and handed over his written complaint to him. It is also claimed that neither any step has been taken by the authorities nor they have given detailed computerized chart to him in spite of repeated request nor even the arrears have been corrected. 4. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order 26.6.2001 (annexure-1) by a Bench of this Court directing the respondents to make available the computerized bill to the petitioner from the month March, 2000 till the date of issue within a period of one week from 3 the date of receipt/production of a copy of the said order. It was also observed that if petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid detailed chart supplied to him, he may move the Principal General Manager (Telecom) for redressal of his grievances and if necessary he may even raise a dispute under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. It was also directed that if such a dispute is raised the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority in accordance with law preferably within a period of two months from the date of appointment of arbitrator. It was further observed that in case it is found that the petitioner has made payment entirely of what was required to be paid by him, then the aforesaid money should be refunded to the petitioner or it shall be adjusted in his subsequent bills. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the said order of this Court he approached the authority concerned and raised dispute and finally letter dated 6.7.2004 (annexure 2) was issued by the Sub- Divisional Engineer (Legal), in the Office of Principal General Manager, (Telecom), District: Patna stating that the following reliefs had been given by the Principal General Manager (Telecom), District: Patna to the petitioner:- 4 (i) Rebate in local calls exceeding 500 calls in each bills till bill dated 18.7.2003 in which calls exceeded above 500. (ii) In respect of bill dated 18.9.2003 , 18.11.2003 & 18.1.2004 rebate of 1000 (one thousand) calls is allowed as benefit of doubt in each bills by Area Manager(rural). (iii) Rent rebate from 10.8.2000 to 2.9.2000 and from 24.9.2000 to 29.10.2000 also allowed due to telephone was under interruption during that period. In the said letter, it was also stated that the application of the petitioner for review of excess metering in bills dated 18.9.2003, 18.11.2003 and 18.1.2004 is under process and result will be communicated after the approval of Principal General Manager (Telecom), District: Patna. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the said letter and in spite of passage of six years the petitioner’s application for review mentioned above has not 5 been decided nor any communication to that effect has been made to the petitioner. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Principal General Manager (Telecom), District: Patna (respondent no. 2) to decide the petitioner’s application for review mentioned above, if not yet disposed of, expeditiously without any further delay, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Bhardwaj ( S.N.Hussain, J.)