The complainant, Ashok Kumar, had alleged that the Congress leader had caused a loss of Rs 73.28 lakh to the exchequer by allegedly bending rules to extend benefits to Ved Pahuja and Associates.
The complaint said the firm was appointed as consultants and engaged for all outdoor publicity despite it not being empanelled by the Directorate of Information and Publicity (DIP) or the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP).
The order, dated July 25, came nearly two weeks after Dikshit was appointed as the Congress' chief ministerial candidate in Uttar Pradesh.
The order said that following Kumar's plea for a detailed inquiry through an independent agency to ascertain the actual loss to the exchequer, a notice was issued to Dikshit on February 12, 2013.
An amicus curiae, who was appointed at a later stage in the case, also conceded before the forum that there was nothing on record to bring home the allegation of culpability against the respondent.