ORDER : This appeal is directed against order dated 11.11.2005 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'the National Commission') whereby the respondent's revision was allowed and the direction given by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'the State Commission') for issue of possession and no objection certificates and delivery of allotted site to the appellants was set aside. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. We have also gone through the judgment of this Court in Bangalore Development Authority v. Aircraft Employees' Cooperative Society Limited and Others (2012) 3 SCC 442 , to which reference was made by Shri P.Viswanatha Shetty, learned senior counsel for the respondent. 3. The writ petitions filed by the respondent and other similarly situated societies questioning the validity of Section 32 (5-A) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976, were allowed by the High Court. On appeal this Court reversed the judgment of the High Court but gave direction to the State Government to take appropriate decision in context of its communication dated 3.5.2005. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under: "In the result, the appeals are allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petitions filed by the respondents are dismissed subject to the direction that within three months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this judgment, the State shall take appropriate decision in the context of communication dated 03.05.2005. Within this period, the State Government shall also decide whether the levy of supervision charges, improvement charges, examination charges, slum clearance development charges and MRTS cess at the rates specified in the communications of the BDA was excessive. The decision of the State Government should be communicated to the respondents within next four weeks. If any of the respondents feel aggrieved by the decision of the State Government then it shall be free to avail appropriate legal remedy. The parties shall bear their respective costs." 4. Learned senior counsel for the respondent stated that as per his information the State Government has, so far, not passed any order in compliance of the direction given by this Court. The parties shall bear their respective costs." 4. Learned senior counsel for the respondent stated that as per his information the State Government has, so far, not passed any order in compliance of the direction given by this Court. He submitted that except three of the appellants all other members have paid the dues of the society and gave out that if charges deposited by the society under various heads are reduced by the State Government then the excess amount will be refunded to the members subject to verification of the record. 5. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of in the following terms: (1) within three months from today, the appellants shall pay the balance amount in terms of the demand created by the respondent and (2) if the decision taken by the State Government in compliance of the direction given by this Court in Bangalore Development Authority v. Aircraft Employees' Cooperative Society Limited (Supra) results in reduction of different charges/cess then the respondent shall refund the proportionate amount to the appellants. Appeal disposed of.