This Revision Petition is directed against the impugned order of the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow dated 04.05.2012 which is reproduced thus:- ist has been reprised. Despite the uploading of cause list on the website of this Honle Forum and availability of the same on the internet and after proper information, today also during the proceeding none appeared on behalf of both the parties. Hence from the above it is clear that the appellant has no interest in the proceedings of this appeal. Accordingly due to non appearance of the appellants this appeal is being dismissed in default for non-prosecution. Ld. Sh. Nikhil Jain, Advocate for the Petitioner has contended that the Petitioner Appeal No. 2253 of 2006 against the order of the District Consumer Forum was admitted by the State Commission in the year 2006 and the matter was directed to be listed for final hearing on its turn in due course. It is submitted that on 04.05.2012 the matter was listed for final hearing and the cause list was uploaded on website, however no notice of hearing was served on the Petitioner. Thus the Petitioner not being aware of the date of hearing could put in appearance either in person or through her counsel. Therefore, this is a case of unintentional default and the State Commission ignoring the fact that notice of hearing was not served on the Petitioner dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution which amounts to violation of principle of natural justice and as such the impugned order is not sustainable. I have considered the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and perused the record. On perusal of the impugned order it is noticed that no notice of hearing was sent to Petitioner and the State Commission has dismissed the appeal in default only on the ground that date of hearing was uploaded on the website of the State Commission for the information of the parties. This approach of the State Commission in our view is wrong. Since the matter was coming up for hearing after 2006 it was incumbent upon the State Commission to serve notice on the parties. By failing to do so the State Commission has deprived the Petitioner of his legal right to being heard. This amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. Revision Petition is, therefore accepted and the impugned order is set aside. Matter is remanded back to the State Commission for hearing on merit after notice to the Respondent. Petitioner is directed to appear before the State Commission on 12.03.2013. Copy of the order be sent to the State Commission for information and necessary action.