Sullia: In a case highlighting lapses in telecom service delivery, the consumer court has directed Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) to pay compensation of ₹30,000 to a resident of Puchappadi village for prolonged internet disruption.
The complainant, Harisubrahmanya, had been using a BSNL Airfiber connection since February 2019, paying a monthly subscription fee of ₹589. According to the complaint, the internet service was completely disrupted from December 26, 2024, causing significant inconvenience.
Harisubrahmanya alleged that despite lodging multiple complaints with the local BSNL office and its customer service centre, the issue remained unresolved for an extended period. The continued disruption reportedly affected his daily activities, prompting him to seek redressal through legal means.
With no satisfactory response from the service provider, he approached the consumer commission, citing deficiency in service and mental distress caused due to the prolonged outage.
After examining the case and hearing both sides, the consumer commission ruled in favour of the complainant. The commission observed that once a service provider collects regular subscription charges, it is obligated to ensure uninterrupted and quality service to its customers.
The order clearly stated that failure to address repeated complaints regarding service disruption amounts to 'deficiency in service' under consumer protection laws. The commission also noted that ignoring customer grievances reflects negligence on the part of the service provider.
The commission directed BSNL to pay a total compensation of ₹30,000 within 45 days from the date of the order. This amount includes ₹25,000 towards deficiency in service and mental agony suffered by the complainant, along with ₹5,000 to cover litigation expenses.
Additionally, the commission issued a warning that failure to comply with the order within the stipulated period would attract an annual interest of 6 per cent on the outstanding amount until it is fully paid.
The ruling reinforces the accountability of service providers in maintaining consistent service standards and addressing customer complaints promptly. It also underscores the role of consumer courts in protecting the rights of individuals against service deficiencies.
The case serves as a reminder to telecom operators to strengthen their grievance redressal mechanisms, while encouraging consumers to seek legal remedies when faced with persistent service issues.