No person has an unqualified
right to have his application for transfer of a telephone granted to him. The same must depend upon the discretion
to be exercised by the Government in dealing .
[Mather vs. Vijya Movie ILR 1978 (1) Ker .275. Chief Justice V.Gopalan Nambiar
]
License granted for maintaining STD public telephone at a particular place. No right has been reserved in favour of the licence to ask for maintaining the telephone to any other place of his desire. [Laxman Rao vs Telecom District Manager. AIR 1998 Kant 67. G.C.Bharuka (J)]
There is a delay of 6 months in
shifting the telephones. The delay was
not explained by the Telecom Department Property. The Forum awarded compensation.
[Madras Telephones and another v. N. Gopalakrishnan. 1997(2) CPR. 187]
A subscriber had asked for
shifting of the telephone as he was carrying on a family business and it was
shifted by the authorities and extension was also granted to the original
premises and thus it was used at both the premises. In the circumstances it was held that the phone could not be
disconnected on the allegation that the same was used by somebody other than
actual subscribers. [Harphool
Singh v. Union of India. AIR 1985 P
& H 28]
If the deceased has left a will
specifically providing the telephone connection, such connection shall be
transferred in the name of that person but in case the will is silent in this
regard, then the telephone connection shall be transferred to one of the
beneficiaries in whose favour the consent is given by the other
beneficiaries. In case the deceased
dies without executing any will, and not leaving behind any spouse alive, the
telephone connection ad to be transferred in the name of one of the children of
the deceased residing at the station by mutual consent of the other
children. The requirement of mutual
consent would be applicable to all the children of the deceased even if one of
them is residing outside India. [Himmesh
Sabhlok v. Indian Telecommunication Department. AIR 1989 P & H 224]
Despite repeated requests and
reminders and notice for demand for justice, at no stage was informed of the reasons
for not restoring telephone connection.
Elementary rules of natural justice cannot be overlooked or ignore in
exercise of discretionary powers. The
order refusing to restore the telephone connection will not stand. [Amreek Singh v. District Manager. AIR 1987 MP 278]