ORDER (Per: Justice Irshad Hussain, President): Service provider has, by way of this revision petition under Section 17 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, challenged the legality and propriety of the impugned order dated 18.02.2006 passed by the District Forum, Udham Singh Nagar and holding that the Forum has absolute jurisdiction to entertain the consumer complaint No. 70 of 2004 filed by Upbhokta Kalyan Samiti/ Consumer Welfare Council, Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar through its President and that the said complainant has right to file complaint under Section 12 (b) of the Act for the deficiency in the services of the revision – petitioner. 2. Complaint was filed mainly with the allegations that the service provider – Star Channels, which distribute various channels for its viewers of the television subscribers, made deficiency in service during the programme/serials “Kahani Ghar Ghar Ki” and “Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi” aired at the night of 05.04.2004 and when during the showing of these serials message “this cable network has large payment due and cable for disconnection” was showed and which resulted in creating interruption/ obstruction in the programme and deprived the consumers from entertainment by viewing fully the programme/serials. Cable Operator was not made party in the complaint. The revision petitioner challenged the maintainability of the complaint as well as the locus standi of the complainant to file the complaint, but these objections were not sustained and by rejecting these objections, the District Forum by the impugned order, has held that the complaint is legally maintainable and the Forum has jurisdiction to decide it on merit. 3. At the time of the arguments of the case, none appeared on behalf of the complainant. We have heard the learned counsel for the revision – petitioner and carefully perused the material on record in the light of the legal aspects of the case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we need not dilate on the respective contentions of the parties, which were placed before the District Forum and find it sufficient to refer to a decision of this Commission rendered in the case of Zee Turner Limited Vs. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we need not dilate on the respective contentions of the parties, which were placed before the District Forum and find it sufficient to refer to a decision of this Commission rendered in the case of Zee Turner Limited Vs. Sanjeev Chauhan and others on 07.01.2008 [I (2008) CPJ 318], in order to indicate that the case put forward by the complainant pertain to dispute between group of consumers and service provider and, therefore, such a dispute by virtue of Section 14 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997, being adjudicable by Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) under the said Act, the complaint on behalf of the group of consumers filed by the society, was not legally maintainable. Therefore, the revision petition need to be disposed of accordingly and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The dispute on behalf of the group of consumers may very well be raised before the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal under the TRAI Act. 4. In view of above, revision petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 18.02.2006 passed by the District Forum is set aside and the consumer complaint No. 70 of 2004 is dismissed as not maintainable. No order as to cost. Copy of the order be sent to the District Forum concerned.