MIR DARA SHEKO, J. - (1.) None appears to represent the opposite party despite service of notice, while Mr Bhattacharya, learned senior Advocate assisted by Ms Chakraborty, represents the petitioners in both the revisional applications.
(2.) The applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are taken up for hearing and for disposal on merit at the instance of Mr Bhattacharya. Mr. Bhattacharya invited attention of this Court to the very first order dated August 26, 2016 passed by this Court, while admitting the revisional applications, and submitted that the impugned order dated July 25, 2016 passed by the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, West Bengal in First Appeal No. A/640/2016 is liable to be set aside by invoking the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, since the applications bearing objections as raised by the petitioners were not attended to and not considered on merit and by passing the orders impugned without reasons rendered injustice in the decision-making process.
(3.) Perused the materials on record and the orders impugned -July 25, 2016 and August 8, 2016.;