We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

          Their main grievance is that the order passed by the State Commission is not a speaking order and the said Commission has not dealt with the submissions made by them during the course of arguments before the State Commission.

          On a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the said order cannot at all be said to be a speaking order.  The State Commission has not dealt with any submission of either party in the aforesaid order.  In our view, the State Commission, while disposing of the appeals before the District Forum, should have re-examined the facts of the case in the light of the contention advanced by the parties to the appeals.  That having not been done, there is no option, but to set aside the impugned order and remit it back to the State Commission for passing a reasoned order dealing with the contentions advanced by the parties at the time of hearing before the State Commission.

          Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 08.08.2014, passed by the State Commission and remit the matter back to the said Commission for deciding the appeals afresh after giving a fresh opportunity of hearing to the parties and dealing with the submissions made by them during the course of hearing.

The parties shall appear before the State Commission on 12.01.2015.  We also request the State Commission to decide the appeals within three months of the parties appearing before it.