| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLD 349 = 2001 YLR 1293 |
Constitutional Petition No.4347 of . 1997, heard on 6th July, 2001.
Muhammad Sair Ali, J
MUHAMMAD BABAR---Petitioner
VERSUS
SENIOR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE, RECOVERY, F.T.R., FAISALABAD and 2 others---Respondents
Law:
Section:
In this Constitutional petition, action of the respondents disconnecting petitioner's Telephone No.616501 has been challenged on grounds of being incompetence, mala fide, arbitrary and without lawful authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that disconnection of petitioner's Telephone No.616501 was ordered by Senior Special. Magistrate, Faisalabad and not by Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (P.T.A.,) or any of its officers and Senior Special Magistrate, Faisalabad had no powers or authority to order disconnection of petitioner's telephone. It is further contended that even otherwise, the reasons contained in the said order are extraneous, illogical, unreasonable, arbitrary, discriminatory and absolutely illegal. The pretext, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, was that another Telephone No.682580 admittedly belonging to weekly newspaper "Taj" had outstanding in arrears of Rs.7,891. Further petitioner's telephone was held to be in "working order in the same name, same premises, blood relation" and respondent No.1 felt that the "said defaulter i.e. newspaper" should not be allowed to use petitioner's telephone in order to inflict "pinch" and pain on the defaulter. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that petitioner's Telephone No.616501 was installed at Plot No.65. Street No.4, Babar Market, Kutchery Bazar, Faisalabad, which was claimed to be 5 to 6 k.ms. away from the said defaulter's premises at Adam Chowk Near Water Tanki, Ghulam Muhammad Road, Faisalabad, where defaulter's Telephone No.682530 was operating. It is further contended that the petitioner's telephone was ordered to be disconnected, not because of petitioner's default or on the basis of any evidence that the said telephone was being used by any other persons. It was contended further that the petitioner was always up to date in payment of his bills. Learned counsel for the petitioner was confronted with the remedies in section 7 of Pakistan Telecommunication (Reorgani zation) Act, 1996 and Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan's judgment in Civil…