JUSTICE V.K.JAIN (ORAL) These revision petitions are directed against the order of the State Commission, whereby an appeal and a revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the orders of the State Commission were dismissed for want of non-prosecution. 2. It is submitted that the counsel of the petitioner had engaged a local lawyer at Patna to represent the petitioner before the State Commission and on 7.2.2019, the post of the Hon’ble President of the State Commission was vacant. On 8.2.2019, the Registrar of the State Commission informed the Delhi counsel of the petitioner that no hearing will take place at the State Commission till appointment of a new President. It is also stated that the status of the matters was not updated on the website of the State Commission. The Registrar of the State Commission intimated the main counsel of the petitioner on 28.5.2019 that the cases had been uploaded on the website. When the counsel checked the status of the matters on the Confonet, they were still showing 9.5.2019 as the next date. On 17.6.2019, the petitioner came to know of the order dated 21.5.2019 dismissing the appeal of the revision petition for non-prosecution. 3. I am satisfied for the reasons stated herein above that the absence of the petitioner before the State Commission was not deliberate or contumacious. No other contention is advanced by either party. 4. The revision petitions are, therefore, allowed and the appeal and petition which the petitioner had filed before the State Commission are restored to their original number subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000/- in each matter to be paid to the complainant, within a period of two weeks from today. 5. The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 14th January 2020. On the said date, the State Commission shall proceed with the appeal and the revision petition in accordance with the law. | 
