The court upheld the validity of the telephone bills but directed the exclusion of charges for 0900 series billing and ordered the investigation of Premium Rate Services.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. Since the issues involved in the above writ petitions have arisen out of the same facts and circumstances, a common order is passed.

3. It has been stated that the petitioner in W.P.No.3210 of 2001, is having the telephone with telephone No.4990570 in his premises at No.14-B, 3rd Floor, Rams Apartment, 78A, T.T.K. Road, Alwarpet, Chennai, under the OYT Scheme. The said telephone had been installed in the premises of the petitioner in the year, 1987. Since the usage of the telephone is minimal, the bill amounts had varied from 350/- to 550/-. However, the petitioner had received the bill, dated 30.10.2000, for the period 8. 2000 to 30.9.2000 for Rs.2,20,691/-. Since the petitioner had not used his telephone to that extent, he had made a detailed representation to the third respondent, on 210. 2000, requesting him to investigate the matter, apart from referring the disputed bill to arbitration. The petitioner had also requested the third respondent to issue a provisional bill so as to enable him to pay the amount taking into consideration the average of three months bill amount prior to the disputed bill, dated 30.10.2000. On 11. 2000, the second respondent had sent a letter stating that the telephone bill had been issued to the petitioner based on the actual usage of the telephone.

.4. While so, the petitioners telephone had been disconnected for non-payment of the bill amount. It was found that most of the calls, which had been made to the numbers starting from 0900, have been mostly made when the petitioner was away from his place. Since there was abnormal misuse of the facility, which has been widely reported, and since it had given rise to a number of litigations, the respondents had withdrawn the facilities during the months of November and December 2000. W.P.No.3357 of 2001:

.5. It has been stated that the petitioner in W.P.No.3357 of 2001 is having the telephone with telephone No.4971743 in his premises at No.7, Manasveni, 78-A, T.T.K. Road, Alwarpet, Chennai, under the OYT Scheme. The said telephone had been installed in the premises of the petitioner in the year, 1996. Since the usage of the telephone is minimal, the average bill amount had never exceeded Rs.1,000/-. However, the petitioner had received the bill, dated 8. 2000, for the period 6. 2000 to 37. 2000 for Rs.95,445/-. Since the petitioner had not used his telephone to that extent, he had made a detailed representation to the concerned officials, on 30.8.2000, requesting them to investigate the matter and to send an amended bill to enable him to make the necessary payment. On 20.9.2000, the second respondent had sent a letter stating that the telephone bill had been issued to the petitioner based on the actual usage of the telephone. Further, in the bill, dated 10. 2000, for the period from 8. 2000 to 30.9.2000, a sum of RS.30,485/-, had been demanded for 23271 units. Since the petitioner was not liable to pay such huge amounts, the bills remained unpaid.

6. While so, the petitioners telephone had been disconnected for non-payment of the bill amount. It was found that most of the calls, which had been made to the numbers starting from 0900, have been mostly made, when the petitioner was away from his place. Further, the excess charges relate to the alleged calls made to chat lines through 0900 facility. However, the petitioner was not aware of the existence of the said facility and the specific telephone numbers through which the chart lines could be accessed. The facility had been tagged on to the S.T.D. facility of the petitioners telephone number by the respondents, without the knowledge of the petitioner and without his consent. Since the unilateral act of the Department is arbitrary and illegal, they cannot demand the excess charges from the petitioner. Since there was an abnormal misuse of the facility, which has been wide