ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The judgment dated 03.05.2018 passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the High Court of Bombay in W.P. No. 2104 of 2017, entertaining the said writ petition against the order placing the respondent ex parte, passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai Circuit Bench at Aurangabad (hereinafter, “the State Commission”), and setting aside the said order of the State Commission, has been called into question in this appeal.

3. The records reveal that the respondent-Bank was placed ex parte before the State Commission for failing to appear before it despite service of notice. Subsequently, an application was filed by the respondent-Bank to set aside the order placing it ex parte, which came to be dismissed by the State Commission on the ground that it does not have jurisdiction to recall its own prior order.

4. As against this order, the respondent herein approached the High Court by filing a writ petition. Entertaining the same, the High Court passed the impugned order and set aside the order of the State Commission placing the respondent ex parte. A contention was raised before the High Court by the appellant herein that an alternat