SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(Ker) 223

BHASKARAN NAMBIAR
K. V. MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT MANAGER, TELEPHONES – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The petitioner, a Proprietor of a Cinema theatre, applied for a telephone connection and deposited a sum of Rs. 1000/- for the purpose. He claimed preference under Non-OYT special category and it was rejected by order dated 13-10-1980 (Ext P7) on the ground that'Cinema Talkies/Theatres are not eligible for special category. The petitioner seeks to quash Ext. P3 and pray for consequential reliefs.

2. Executive instructions have been issued by the Postal Department from time to time regarding allotment of telephones under the OYT, Special and General categories.

3. Under OYT (Own your Telephone) scheme, an applicant

"makes an advance lump-sum payment in the form of advance payment of part of the rent for certain number of years. The subscriber gets a rebate and is liable to pay less rent than the normal rent fixed by the Department.

4. Under Non-OYT scheme,

"an applicant makes an advance deposit, the amount depending upon capacity of the exchange. When a telephone is sanctioned, this deposit is adjusted towards security deposit, advance quarterly rent and installation charges. The subscriber is liable to pay normal rent fixed by the Department."

The petitioner, admittedly ha




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top