Chaini Parwani –
Published On: October 22, 2021 at 18:00 IST
The Supreme Court explained that the procedure of filling up vacancies in the State Consumer Commissions as per Notice issued by it on 11th August 2021 must not be delayed by the Judgement issued by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court on 14/09.2021 overruling specific Consumer Protection Rules.
The Bench passed a Notification stating, “We had issued a direction on 11/08/2021 to ensure that the vacancies are filled in on the Chairman and members of the Consumer forums…Thereafter, learned Amicus pointed out that certain rules had been struck down by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court and that the same may have an impact on the process already started in other States. “
The Bench stated that in order to fill up the vacancies, the timeline and processes fixed by must proceed, as in some cases, appointments have been made and in others, the appointment process is at an advanced stage.
The issue came to light while the Supreme Court was scrutinizing the Suo Motu Case observed to deal with the vacancies in Consumer Commissions across the country.
Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan intimated the Bench of the Bombay High Court’s decision of abolishing Rule 3(2)(b), Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 6(9) of the Rules, 2020 claimed that an explanation was required for other states where the Rules have not been set upon to move ahead with the same.
The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) Division Bench comprising of Justices Sunil Shukre and Anil Kilor on September 14, 2021, abolished certain provisions of the new Consumer Protection Rules 2020, which prescribe a minimum professional experience of 20 years and 15 years for adjudicating members of the State Consumer Commissions and District forums, respectively.
The Bench clarified that the State and the Union Government are free to file a Special Leave Petition challenging the stated Judgement of the Bombay High Court.
The Bench had earlier highlighted that the Bombay High Court would be at liberty to direct its pronouncement of the validity of the Consumer Protection Rules, regardless of the Suo Motu case before the Supreme Court.
Also Read: Plea in Bombay High Court challenges validity of appointment under Consumer Protection Rules 2020
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and Landmark Judgments