ORDER :

1. The petitioner, being the claimant, has filed this application seeking to quash the award dated 13-7-2000 passed by the Arbitrator-cum-Area Manager, Telecom (City), Office of the G.M. Telecom, Cuttack under S.7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, directing to pay the outstanding amount of Rs. 8,40,568.00/- in forty equal instalments, the last date of each instalment will be 7th of every month starting from the month of August, 2000.

2. The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner is the former member of Parliament (10th Lok Sabha) from Kalahandi Constituency in the State of Odisha. He continued in office from 1991 up to 15th May, 1996. Being a member of Parliament, he was provided with certain privileged facilities including telephone facility. Such facility is governed under the Housing and Telephone Facilities (Members of Parliament) Rules, 1956. The said Rule has been framed in exercise of the power conferred by the Central Government under the Salary and Allowances of Member of Parliament’s Act, 1954. In terms of the aforesaid Rules, as it stood prior to the amendment on 30th August, 1997, a Member of Parliament was entitled to have one telephone at his residence or office at New Delhi and another telephone at his usual place of residence or at a place selected by him and was provided with 25,000 free calls per annum, from each telephone. The calls made from the said two telephones are pooled together and thus, a Member of Parliament is not required to make the payment in respect of 50,000 calls from the two telephones, during a year. The excess calls made over and above the pooled 50,000 free calls per annum can also be adjusted against the 50,000 free calls for the next year. In terms of Rules 444 to 453 of P & T Manual (Volume-XIV), the charges for the local calls to the extent of 50,000 calls in respect of the two telephones in a year are borne by the Lok Sabha/Rajya Sabha Secretariat, as the case may be, and the charges for the calls in excess thereof, are billed against the concerned Member of Parliament and are deducted from his/her salary through the Secretariat. Accordingly, the petitioner by virtue of his status as a Member of Parliament, was provided with one telephone bearing No. 379-2116 at New Delhi and another telephone bearing No. 330353 at his Constituency at Bhawanipatna. The telephone at New Delhi operated from 25-6-91 till 23-5-96 and during his tenure as a Member of Parliament, he was never served with any bill nor any amount was ever deducted from his salary towards the charges for excess call and as such, the petitioner was all along under a bona fide impression that the call made from the two telephones are well within the permissible limit of 50,000 calls per annum. However, after dissolution of the 10th Lok Sabha, the petitioner was served with a bill of Rs. 4,26,963/- towards the charges for the alleged excess calls over and above the free calls as aforesaid. Consequently, the petitioner made a representation to the then Minister of Communications, Govt. of India and also raised a dispute before the appropriate authority for correction of the bills. In the meantime the bill amount has been increased up to Rs. 8,40,568/- out of which the petitioner has already paid Rs. 53,000/- without prejudice to his contention and after lot of persuasion, the Assistant Director General (TR) in the Department of Telecommunication, by a letter dated 17-9-99, appointed Sri B. Mallick, the then Director (RTTC), Bhubaneswar as the Arbitrator to resolve (he dispute. The Arbitrator passed the impugned award on 13-7-2000 by which the petitioner has been made liable to pay a sum of Rs. 8,40,568/- in 40 equal instalments payable within 7th of each month, starting from August, 2000. Hence this application.

3. Mr. S.K. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner assails the award passed by (he Arbitrator under S.7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on the grou