The Supreme Court has scheduled hearings next week to address the validity of the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020, concerning the appointment of members to consumer commissions. The Bombay High Court had previously struck down Rule 6(1), which mandated the inclusion of state bureaucrats and judiciary members in the selection committee. The Supreme Court extended the temporary stay on the High Court’s judgment, ensuring current appointees remain in service until a final decision is made. The matter will be heard on May 27, 2024.
Background and Key Issues
Rule 6(1) of Consumer Protection Rules, 2020:
- This rule outlines the qualifications, recruitment methods, and appointment procedures for members of State and District Consumer Commissions.
- The rule was invalidated by the Bombay High Court for giving undue preference to state bureaucrats over judiciary members in the selection process.
Petitioners’ Arguments:
- Examination and Interviews: Petitioners argued that candidates must clear a written examination and an interview, ensuring merit-based selection.
- State’s Role: Unlike other tribunals, consumer forums typically handle cases involving private individuals, limiting the state’s vested interest in litigation outcomes.
Supreme Court’s Actions:
- The Court maintained the stay on the High Court’s judgment, acknowledging the urgency and potential disruption for current appointees.
- The case is set for disposal on May 27, 2024, reflecting the court’s commitment to a swift resolution.
Implications
This ruling will have significant implications for the functioning of consumer commissions across India, ensuring a balanced and fair selection process. The decision will address the concerns about the influence of state bureaucracy in judicial appointments, maintaining the integrity of consumer protection mechanisms.