The Kerala High Court, presided by Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., dismissed a writ petition filed by a BSNL consumer challenging the rejection of a review petition by a Permanent Lok Adalat. The Court held that Permanent Lok Adalats do not have the statutory power to review their decisions on merits under Section 22D of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
Background:
Petitioner Prakash Sankar, a BSNL postpaid mobile subscriber, had travelled to Dubai on November 30, 2015, after activating international roaming. Subsequently, he was issued high-value mobile bills totaling ₹1,27,462. He challenged the billing through O.P. No. 40/2016 before the Permanent Lok Adalat under Section 22C(1) read with Section 22A(b)(ii) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
BSNL submitted that the petitioner was on Data Plan 501, which provided 5GB of data for international roaming. Due to data usage far exceeding the credit limit, an automated pre-barring message was issued, and services were suspended. The billing records indicated heavy data usage across four days. BSNL argued that smartphone background applications could cause substantial data consumption and that usage logs confirmed the charges were legitimate.
The Permanent Lok Adalat dismissed the petition after finding that the petitioner failed to prove any error in the billing and that the detailed call data and usage records supported BSNL’s claim.
Review Petition and High Court Proceedings:
Following the dismissal, the petitioner filed a review petition under Section 22D of the Legal Services Authorities Act, contending that BSNL had withheld key documents and committed fraud upon the court. The Permanent Lok Adalat dismissed the review petition without issuing notice to the respondent, holding that it had no power to reappreciate evidence or reassess the matter on merits.
Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., after examining the statutory provisions and precedents including Kapra Mazdoor Ekta Union v. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [(2005) 13 SCC 777] and Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal [AIR 1981 SC 606], held that:
“A review on merits, which involves re-examining the correctness of a decision, can only be exercised if specifically permitted by law.”
The Court further noted that Section 22D only provides procedural guidance and does not confer any merit-based review powers on the Lok Adalat. The reliance placed by the petitioner on a Punjab and Haryana High Court decision was rejected, with the Court stating it was not good law.
Decision:
Concluding that the review sought was a merit-based review which is impermissible under the statute, Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. dismissed the writ petition, upholding the decision of the Permanent Lok Adalat.
Case Title: Prakash Sankar v. BSNL and Others
Writ Petition: WP(C) No. 27890 of 2018
