These two revision petitions have been filed assailing the orders passed by the SCDRC UT Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) dated 30.09.2022 in two separate appeals that were directed against the orders of the DCDRC-II, UT Chandigarh. The revision petitions were entertained and notices were issued, upon which learned counsel for the respondents has put in appearance in both the revision petitions. The revision petitions were taken up on 22.07.2024 and during the oral submissions raised, certain observations were made, for which learned counsel for the parties wanted to take instructions. Both the learned counsel are present online and IA No. 11293 and 11294 of 2024 have been moved in revision petitions no. 1617 and 1616 of 2022 respectively where it has been stated in para-4 to 10 as follows:- “4. That, the above stated petition was listed before the Hon'ble Commission in Court No. 1 as on 22.07.2024 in the cause list. The undersigned has mentioned at the time of rising of the Hon'ble Bench that the petition may be disposed by way of remand to the Ld. State Commission with direction to deal with all the issues involved in the appeal in the light of the judgments submitted by the petitioner herein/appellant therein. The Hon'ble Bench agreed but both the counsels for the respondents were not available at that particular point of time. 5. That both the counsels and all the parties are ad idem on the point that the case be remanded to the Ld. State Commission to decide afresh after reconsidering the law and hearing all the parties. 6. That, in view of the above it would be in the interest of justice to prepone the date of hearing and take up the case on board to remand the case back to the Ld. SCDRC, Chandigarh for deciding afresh. 7. That this course of action would not prejudice any party as it is the avowed principle of law to hear and decide any case after duly hearing and considering the arguments and contentions and facts presented by both side parties. 8. Moreover, in the present case, none of the concerned parties have any objection to the adoption of the above course of action. 9. That it would not be expedient to keep a Lis pending when it can be disposed of with directions as have been amicably agreed between the parties. 10. That keeping the case pending for another 6 months would be against the principles of justice, as the pendency may unnecessarily aggravate and complicate the matter.” Learned counsel for both the parties have therefore conceded to the position that the order of the State Commission does not take into account the issues that were raised or the judgments that were cited for disposal of the matter on merits. Consequently, the impugned order dated 30.09.2022 is set aside and the revision petitions are allowed. The appeals before the State Commission shall stand restored and shall be disposed of in accordance with law on merits as expeditiously as possible. A copy of this order be placed before the State Commission on 19.08.2024 where-after the State Commission shall proceed accordingly. The matter shall be posted afresh to the Bench as may be allocated by the President of the State Commission. | 
