JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is present in person. The impugned order was passed on 27.9.2012, which is reproduced as under: “27.09.2012 List has been revised. Inspite of upload of cause list on the website of Commission and its publication on the Internet -2- and sufficient information, none is present on behalf of both the parties today at the time of hearing. Hence, it appears from aforesaid that the appellant is not interested in the proceeding of this appeal. Accordingly, for the reason of absence of both the parties, this appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- Sd/- Presiding Member Member” 2. This is another case from State of U.P. The petitioner submits that he did not receive the copy of the order of State Commission. The petitioner further submits that he was lying sick suffering from various ailments i.e. CAD, heart bypass, Neuritis and even now, he is unable to stand in the Commission. The record shows that the other parties have not yet been summoned. 3. This is wrong procedure adopted by the State Commission. Although, there is delay of 1065 days, yet, since the proper procedure was not adopted by the State Commission, therefore, we accept the revision petition and remand the case back to the State Commission to decide it afresh on merits. The order passed by the State Commission is not very clear. If the respondent has already been summoned, he should again be summoned in accordance with law. Notice flashed on -3- the website of the Commission and its reflection on the internet is not a proper procedure of service and shall not be deemed to be sufficient service. The respondent must be served through notice, registered A.D. and speed post. The petitioner is directed to appear before the State Commission on 30.5.2016. The State Commission is requested to decide the case on merits, in accordance with law. 4. A copy of this order be given dasti to the petitioner, free of costs. | 
