Thiru Justice A. Raman, President—The only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the department can disconnect the telephone standing in the name of wife or the mother, as the case may be, for the default committed by the husband or son in respect of the telephone standing in the name of the husband or son.

2. The Lower Forum accepted the Department’s plea and dismissed the complaint.

3. We are of the view that the action of the Department cannot be sustained more so in view of the order passed by the High Court in W.P. Nos. 20033 of 1998 and 20034 of 1998, where the disconnection of a phone of a son for default by the mother and the disconnection of the phone of the wife for the default of the husband was disapproved. The telephone subscriptions are different. The accounts are different. The telephone indicator number is different. If a husband fails to pay the bill amount in respect of the telephone in his name, the telephone standing in the name of the wife cannot be disconnected for such default. Disconnection of telephone would be arbitrary and unreasonable. Besides it would amount to gross deficiency in service. Therefore, the order of the Lower Forum cannot at