CONSUMER ACTION GROUP vs MADRAS METROPOLITAN TELECOM BOARD

THIS is a public interest complainant filed by the Consumer Action Group and SMN Consumer Protection Council. THIS relates to the non-working of the telephones during the period of telecom strike from 3.11.90 to 22.11.90. The relief sought for are threefold : (a) restoration of telecommunications; (b) grant of rebate for the period of non-working and (c) compensation to the subscribers.

THE complaint is resisted and a counter denying the allegations are filed by the Assistant General Manager, Madras Telephones. Relief (a) pertaining to the restoration of telecommunications has since been complied with, has become infructuous and the learned Counsel for the complainants did not press for this relief.

Relief (c) claiming compensation to individual subscribers is vague in the absence of evidence of loss and hardship caused to particular subscribers and advisedly the learned Counsel for the complainants did not advance any arguments on this aspect.

WE are left with relief (b). Admittedly a large number of telephones went out of order during the period of strike and the question is the grant of rental rebate for the period of non- working. It is admitted in the counter filed by opposite parties that as per rules those telephones whose services are affected continuously for a period of seven days and more, are entitled for rental rebate, but it is contended that the individual subscriber should prefer a claim to the Department and rebate will be allowed after examination of the claim. It is urged by the learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties that rebates could not be given for want of written claims from the affected subscribers. The attitude of the Department in insisting on written claims for rental rebate from subscribers is rather unfortunate and runs counter to the express instructions insured by the Ministry of Communications, Government of India (date not given) copy of which has been furnished to the Commission by the Department. "Kindly refer to this office letter No. 3-6/80 rates dated 10.4.1987 on the subject mentioned above wherein the period of eligibility for rebate in rental for prolonged interruption in local telephone service, leased lines and telex services was prescribed as 15 days or more. 2. The matter has been reviewed and it has been decided that rebate in rental for local telephones, telex services, leased lines and junction lines of PABXs/PBXs may be permitted when these services of the subscriber remain interrupted continuously for 7 days or more due to departmental reasons. Rebate in rental in such cases should be granted on Department''s initiative without waiting for a representation from subscriber. 3. Regarding leased circuits it should be out endeavour to ensure that they remain serviceable. They should be regularly monitored to ensure serviceability. 4. Other conditions stipulated in this office letter No. 3-6/80 Rates dated 10.4.1987 remain unchanged. 5. The above orders have come into effect from 15.6.1990. A Gazette Notification incorporating the necessary amendments in the relevant Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951, has been issued. A copy of which is enclosed for information. 6. Receipt of this letter may kindly be acknowledged.

HINDI version will follow. There is separate card for each phone number in the Exchange in which the date and the number of local and trunk calls are metriculously recorded and it is from these cards, the by-monthly phone bills are prepared and sent to the subscribers. It is admitted by the Departmental Engineer present before us, that it can be easily ascertained from this card whether the particular phone has not been functioning for a continuous period of 7 days and more and it is because of this facility, the Government have issued the above instructions to grant rebate "suo motto" on the Department''s initiative without waiting for a represen- tation from subscriber". The telecom strike was over by 22.11.90 and normally was restored in a few days. Even assuming that time was too short to give rebate in the phone bill for the month of December 1990, there could have been no difficulty in granting the rebate in the bills for the months of January and February 1991. No attempt in this direction has been taken so far, obviously because the Department has been insisting on written representation from the subscribers. This stand of the Department is in contemptuous violation of the express directions of the Government of India in the Ministry of Communications. The Government have done all they could help the subscribers and have issued the necessary instructions in the clearest possible terms, but the Departmental men have their own way of dealing with the subscribers and take a morbid pleasure in taking the subscribers for a ride. The alacrity with which phones are disconnected for non payment of the bills within the stipulated time is "commendable", but why should not such an alacrity be displayed in granting the necessary rebate to the consumers. The practice adopted by the Department and its men cannot be too strongly condemned. In the result we order that the opposite parties shall suo motto without any request from the subscribers give rental rebate to all the subscribers in their whose phones have not been functioning continuously for 7 days and more during the aforesaid period of strike in the phone bills to be issued in months of April or May 1991, on pain of penal action under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act in case of default.

IT is further ordered that any subscriber whose phone had been out of order continuously for 7 days and more during the said period of strike and who has not been given the legitimate rental rebate shall be at liberty to move this Commission by means of an interlocutory application in this original petition for appropriate orders.

IT is also ordered that the opposite parties shall pay Rs. 250/- to the complainants as cost. Complaint allowed with cost.