Hon’ble Shri Kant Tripathi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 9.8.2010 passed by the Uttar Pradesh Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’) in revision No. 109 of 2006, whereby the State Commission dismissed the petitioner’s revision and confirmed the order dated 28.4.2006 of the District Forum, Ghaziabad. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the State Commission has passed the aforesaid order in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 17(1)(b) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), therefore, the order so passed is not appealable before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ‘National Commission’). According to Section 19 of the Act only an order passed under sub clause (i) of clause (a) of Section 17 of the Act is appealable before the National Commission, therefore, the instant writ petition under Article