Learned counsel for the respondent filed vakalatnama along with reply. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By impugned order dated 28.06.2011, the complaint was dismissed by the learned State Commission under the impression that the complaint being 10 years old, the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the case. In certified copy of the order, presence of counsel for the parties has been shown. It appears that on the day of dismissal of the complaint, counsel for both the parties were present and in such circumstances the complaint should not have been dismissed under the impression that the complainant was not interested in prosecuting the case. Learned State Commission ought to have heard the parties and decide the complaint on merits particularly when the complainant had already submitted written submissions on 01.12.2010. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the State Commission for deciding the complaint on merits after giving an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. Consequently, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order dated 28.06.2011 passed in O.P. No.165/2001 S.C. Mariappan vs. The Union of India is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the State Commission for deciding the complaint on merits after giving an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. No order as to cost. Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 31.10.2012.