Even at the second pass over, no one is present on behalf of the petitioner / complainant.

          Case of the petitioner as set up in the complaint was that during October / November 2002 to March / April 2006, he had made excess payment of Rs.42,341/-. In fact, the amount payable during this period towards telecom charges was Rs.13,200/- calculated @ Rs.600/- per bill. On contest by the respondent / opposite party, the complaint was dismissed by the District Forum and appeal filed by the petitioner against Forum’s order has been dismissed by the State Commission in terms of the order under challenge particularly taking note of the ratio of the judgment of Supreme Court in General Manager, Telecom vs. M. Krishnan & Another, Vol – III (2009) CPJ 71. In view of this decision, the State Commission has rightly dismissed the appeal against the Forum’s order. There is no illegality or jurisdictional  error  in  the order of State Commission warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed.