instead of merely giving imprimatur to the impugned order of NCDRC on the ground that it was rendered relying on the decision in Raja Vasireddy Komalavalli Kamba’s case. In this context, it is only apposite to note that though the orders were passed by the District Forum which was confirmed by the State Commission would reveal that the analysis and the consequential conclusion arrived at thereunder C.A. No.270 of 2012 Page 16 of 35lie in conformity with the exercise expected to be undertaken based on the aforementioned exposition of law in D. Srinivas’s case (supra). We are not oblivious of the fact that the decision in D. Srinivas’s case (supra) was rendered much later to the order impugned in this appeal. But then, in view of the exposition of law in Murthy v. State of Karnataka & Others5 as also in view of D. Srinivas’s case (supra), if the analysis and the ultimate conclusions of the District Forum is in tune with the decision in D. Srinivas’s case, we are bound to restore the