Patna: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna has ruled against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) in a consumer complaint involving alleged service failure and disputed billing, directing the telecom company to restore services, provide detailed call records and issue a corrected bill.
The commission has also ordered BSNL to refund any amount collected beyond the revised bill and pay ₹1 lakh as compensation for mental harassment and deficiency in service. An additional ₹25,000 has been awarded towards litigation costs.
The order gives consumers an important reminder that telecom service providers must maintain transparency in billing and provide adequate information when customers challenge disputed charges.
Dispute Dates Back to 2017
The case originated from a consumer complaint filed in 2017.
According to the complaint, the consumer had subscribed to BSNL’s ISD and international roaming services. The consumer claimed that despite depositing the required amount and completing the necessary formalities, the SIM service did not work while travelling abroad.
The billing dispute emerged after the consumer returned to India.
BSNL issued a bill of ₹6,69,850, which the consumer disputed. The complainant also stated that BSNL did not provide detailed call records supporting the amount shown in the bill.
The consumer therefore approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna, challenging both the service failure and the disputed billing.
Commission Finds Deficiency in Service
After hearing the matter, the commission held that there was a deficiency in service on BSNL’s part and found merit in the consumer’s concerns regarding the bill.
The commission’s directions require BSNL to address both aspects of the dispute: the interruption of telecom services and the lack of clarity surrounding the charges.
The order specifically requires the company to provide a detailed and accurate record of the consumer’s ISD usage during the relevant period before preparing the revised bill.
BSNL Ordered to Recalculate the Bill
The commission has directed BSNL to provide the consumer with a correct and detailed call record for ISD services used between May 30, 2016 and June 8, 2016.
Based on this record, BSNL must prepare a revised bill.
If the consumer has already paid more than the amount payable under the corrected bill, BSNL must refund the excess amount.
The direction places emphasis on transparent billing and gives the consumer access to the information needed to understand how the charges were calculated.
Telecom Services Must Be Restored
The commission has also directed BSNL to restore the consumer’s mobile, SMS and calling services.
The direction addresses the original complaint that the SIM service failed during the consumer’s overseas travel despite the required payment and formalities being completed.
Restoration of services, along with accurate billing, is intended to resolve the two key concerns raised in the consumer complaint.
₹1 Lakh Compensation for Mental Harassment
Beyond correcting the billing issue, the commission has ordered BSNL to pay ₹1 lakh as compensation for mental harassment and deficiency in service.
The commission has also directed the company to pay ₹25,000 towards the cost of the legal proceedings.
This brings the total compensation and litigation cost awarded by the commission to ₹1.25 lakh, apart from any excess amount that BSNL may have to refund after recalculating the disputed bill.
BSNL Gets 60 Days to Comply
The commission has given BSNL 60 days to comply with the order.
If the company fails to implement the directions within the prescribed period, the amount payable will attract 9% annual interest.
The deadline covers the commission’s directions relating to service restoration, provision of call details, revision of the bill, refund of excess payment and payment of compensation and litigation costs.
Why the Order Matters for Telecom Consumers
The Patna consumer commission’s order highlights the importance of transparent billing in telecom services, particularly when consumers face unusually high bills and seek supporting records.
For customers, detailed usage records can be crucial when verifying charges for services such as international calling and roaming. The order also reinforces the principle that service providers must respond appropriately when consumers raise genuine concerns about billing or service quality.
The case further demonstrates the role of consumer commissions in addressing disputes between customers and service providers. Instead of simply accepting a disputed bill, consumers can seek redress when they believe a service provider has failed to deliver the promised service or provide adequate billing information.
The order was passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna, with President Prem Ranjan Mishra and Member Rajnish Kumar hearing the matter.
The decision combines service restoration, billing correction, refund, compensation and litigation costs, making it a significant consumer relief order in a telecom dispute.
Read Also: Bihar Road Network Gets Push as Samrat Choudhary and Nitin Gadkari Review Key Projects
