IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16643 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED, REGD. OFFICE AT ARAVALI CRESCENT, 1, NELSON MANDELA ROAD, VASANT KUNJ, PHASE II, NEW DELHI-110 070 AND ITS COMMUNI- CATION ADDRESS AT: N.H.BYE-PASS, KUNDANOOR,MARADU P.O.,KOCHI-682304,REP.BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, REKHA AGARWAL, MANAGER - LEGAL & REGULATORY. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.ARUN THOMAS SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASHRAF KOORIYIL, ITI ROAD, NAIRMANMOOLA, VIDYANAGAR P.O., KASARAGOD. 2. KOLIKKARA COMMUNICATION, BANK ROAD, KASARAGOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 16643 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 31st day of May, 2010. J U D G M E N T In respect of a dispute regarding crediting of an amount of Rs. 106/- available in the account of the 1st respondent with the petitioner, the 1st respondent approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The petitioner raised a contention that the same is not maintainable before the Forum, since the remedy of the 1st respondent lies in raising a dispute for arbitration under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act. But, by Ext. P 4 order, the Forum decided in favour of the 1st respondent. The petitioner challenged the same before the State Commission raising the same contention. By an elaborate order, Ext. P6, the Commission found that the complaint is maintainable since Section 7B is not attracted to the dispute between the petitioner and the 1st respondent and dismissed the appeal. The petitioner is challenging the same. I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner insofar as the petitioner has got an effective alternate remedy by way of filing a revision before the National Commission. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.