TTSL failed to provide explanation why the number was transferred to another service provider when the subscriber was not using it for nearly a month while she was out of station.
The East District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum also said TTSL is not a telegraph authority and rejected its contention that the complaint is not maintainable.
"We provided opportunity on January 7, 2013 to opposite party (TTSL) to file on record any rule which empowers it to withdraw the telephone if it is not used for a fixed term. No such rule has been filed despite providing the opportunity.
The bench, also comprising member T Vijayan, said "...The telegraph authority has been clarified by the Delhi High Court in writ petition in J K Mittal vs Union of India case. The General Manager of MTNL and BSNL are covered by the definition of telegraph authority. The private operators are not covered.
More From This Section
"The opposite party (TTSL) is not in any way covered by the definition and as such the provision of section 7B of Telegraph Act shall not be attracted... And complaint shall be maintainable."
The consumer forum directed TTSL to pay Rs 10,000 compensation to Delhi resident Bharti Sethi and asked the service provider to either provide her with her earlier number or one of her choosing.