DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, GANJAM Vs. KUMUDINI DASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have filed this appeal challenging the validity of the order of the District Forum directing them to pay penal interest @ 15% over the amount of Rs. 1,000 from 13.11.2002 to 18.6.2003 and to pay further amount of Rs. 3,000 by way of penalty on the ground that they have not complied wtih its previous order.

(2.) THE respondent filed C. D. Case No. 183 of 2000 before the District Forum against the appellants alleging that her telephone bearing number 78471 was illegally disconnected. She accordingly prayed for restoration of the telephone line and claimed compensation of Rs. 90,000. By order dated 20.12.2001, the District Forum allowed the complaint directing the appellants to restore the telephone connection and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000 as compensation and costs of Rs. 1,000. Against the said order, the appellants filed C. D. Appeal No. 35 of 2002 before this Commission. On 14.2.2002 this Commission while issuing notice in the matter directed stay of operation of the impugned order of the District Forum. The interim order continued till the disposal of the appeal. By the final order dated 20.9.2002, this Commission vacated that part of the order of the District Forum directing the appellants to pay compensation and while confirming the other part of the order directed restoration of the telephone connection within seven days from the date of receipt of the order. In the meantime, the respondent filed C. D. (P) 8 of 2002 (out of which the present appeal arises) before the District Forum alleging non -compliance of the order of the District Forum dated 20.12.2001 passed in C. D. Case No. 183 of 2000. It may be noted that against the aforesaid order of this Commission setting aside the direction of the District Forum to pay compensation, the respondent filed Revision Petition No. 49 of 2003 before the National Commission. The revision was dismissed on 10.3.2003.

(3.) KEEPING the aforesaid facts in view let us examine if there was any valid justification on the part of the respondent to allege non -compliance of the order of the District Forum dated 20.12.2001. It is relevant to mention here that the telephone connection was restored on 13.11.2002. Since this Commission while admitting the appeal directed stay of operation of the impugned order of the District Forum, telephone connection could not have been restored. This Commission while disposing of the appeal granted seven days time from the date of receipt of the order to the appellants to restore telephone connection. Accordingly it was done.