Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
Decision No.3239/IC(A)/2008
F. No.CIC/MA/A/2008/01072
Dated, the 8th September, 2008
Name of the Appellant: Sh. Sunil Pandit Joshi
Name of the Public Authority: B.S.N.L.
i
Facts
:
1. The appellant was heard on 8/9/2008.
2. The appellant had asked for the details of calls made including SMS sent
from the mobile phone, of which he is the subscriber. He alleged that the CPIO
has not furnished the information. As a result of which he was not able to
represent his case for rectification in the excess bills. He stated that on the
advice of the CPIO, he had also approached the grievance cell of the respondent
but of no avail. He also stated that in response to his application for information,
regarding call details, the CPIO has stated as under:
” As the printer of Mobile gallery was not working, the call details were
given from our printer. All columns were not covered i.e. some portion
remained missing.”
3. In absence of the vital information, mainly the call details, the appellant
has suffered financial losses, the appellant stated. He alleged that if some
portion remained missing, his telephone bills should be for a lower amount,
rather than higher, as compared to the past trends.
Decision:
4. The CPIO has admitted that there are erroneous entries in the call details
on the basis of which bills are generated. The CPIO has also admitted that due
to technical snag in the system of recording calls, the correct information about
usage of the phone facility could not be recorded, resulting in excess payment
liability. The appellant has paid above the average bills as compared to the
previous months. All this demonstrate inefficiency in functioning of the
i
“If you don’t ask, you don’t get.” – Mahatma Gandhi
1
respondent and lack of concern to protect the financial interests of the
subscriber.
5. Moreover, the respondent’s grievances cell has also been unable to
redress the grievances of the appellant with regard to his excess bills. As a
result, the appellant attempts to seek justice, has been frustrated due to both
technical snag in recording the call details as well as lack of responsiveness of
the officials responsible for redressal of grievances under the auspices of the
Grievances Forum.
6. Clearly, the appellant has suffered in terms of financial losses as he has
had to pay more than the average user charges (and not less than previous
months). And, due to inefficiency in recording and maintaining the required data,
the appellant’s grievance could not be redressed. In view of this, the Chairman,
BSNL, on behalf of the respondent, is, therefore, directed to pay a
compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) u/s 19(8)(b) of the
Act, to cover all kinds of losses and other detriments suffered by the appellant for
seeking information relating to call details. The above amount should be paid to
the appellant through a Bank Draft in favour of the appellant within one month
from the date of issue of this decision under intimation to the Commission.
7. The appeal is thus disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Central Information Commissioner ii
Authenticated true copy:
(M.C. Sharma)
Assistant Registrar
Name & address of Parties:
1. Sh. Sunil Pandit Joshi, “Deepanjali” F/18, I.U.D.P. Plots, Manmad – 423
104.
2. Sh. G. Jayaraman, General Manager (HQ) & CPIO, Bharat Sanchar
Nigam Limited, MH Telecom Circle, Mumbai – 400 054.
3. Sh. Chandra Prakash, CGM & Appellate Authority, BSNL, Office of the
CGM, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai – 400 054.
4. The Chairman, BSNL, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110
001
ii
“All men by nature desire to know.” – Aristotle
2