Through this revision petition initiated u/s 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as the “Act”) the unsuccessful complainant seeks to challenge the order dated 03.12.09 passed by the Uttarakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dehradun (in short, ‘the State Commission’) by which the State Commission has allowed the appeal filed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nainital against the order dated 02.05.09 ..2.. passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint no. 46/08 thereby awarding a compensation of Rs.20,000/- along with interest @ 6% p.a and Rs.2,000/- as costs. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He seeks to assail the impugned order primarily on the ground that it is based on an erroneous view of the legal settled position. According to him, the fee of Rs.10/- paid by complainant as hammer charges for removal of the wood of the trees fallen in his residence due to storm amounted to the consideration and the State Government would deem to have rendered services within the meaning the Section 2 (1)(o) of the Act by charging this fee and since the requisite permission was not promptly granted for removal of the wood of the trees the State Government has committed deficiency in service. The State Commission has considered this aspect in detail in paragraphs 6 & 7 of the impugned order and held the view that the State cannot be deemed to have rendered services within the meaning of section 2 (1) (o) of the Act even if a fee was prescribed. This Commission is entirely in agreement with the view taken by the State Commission having regard to the scope of the relevant provisions of the Act. We ..3.. do not see any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the order passed by the State Commission warranting interference by this Commission in revisional jurisdiction u/s 21 (b) of the Act, more particularly so when the State Commission has reserved the right with the complainant/petitioner to pursue his remedy before the appropriate forum/tribunal in accordance with law. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.