Food Corporation of India, the petitioner herein, was the opposite party before the District Forum. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent /complainant retired from the service of the petitioner on 30.04.1995. Prior to the joining the petitioner he was serving in Kandla Port Trust and was transferred to the petitioner with all benefits. According to the complainant as per the CGIT Award declared on 5.8.91 all facilities of medical health as made available by the Central Government were to be given to all the employees of petitioner Food Corporation of India. Alleging that the facilities extended by Central Government of India were not extended to the respondent, the complaint was filed before the District Forum claiming the sum of Rs. 23,255/- in all. District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioners to jointly and severally pay Rs. 23,255/- towards medical treatment with running interest @ 9% p.a. Petitioners were further directed to pay Rs. 428.85 per month for medical treatment from May 2000 till the date of order with running interest @ 9% along with costs of Rs. 2,000/- Petitioner being aggrieved filed an appeal inter alia contending that the respondent/original complainant had not exercised their option u/s 12-A(4) of the Food Corporation of India and, therefore, he was not entitled to the benefits of medical reimbursement. State Commission without deciding the above-stated point or any other point confirmed the order passed by the District Forum relying upon a judgement of the National Commission in the case of Computer Control Auditor India Vs. Shivkant Shankernath Nayak, reported as (1) 2003 CPJ 276 (NC). The State Commission being the final Court of fact should have dealt with all the pleas raised by the petitioner by recording the clear-cut findings. The State Commission has not recorded any reasons in support of the conclusions arrived at. The order under revision cannot be sustained and it is accordingly set aside and the case is remanded back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law. State Commission should record its findings on each and every point raised by the petitioner or the respondent. Parties and their respective counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on 16.03.2011. Since it is an old case we would request the State Commission to dispose the appeal expeditiously preferably within four months.