Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has struck down Rule 6 of the Consumer Protection Rules, which pertains to the formation of the Selection Committee responsible for appointing Presidents and Members of the State and District Consumer Commissions.

A division bench at the Bombay High Court at Nagpur comprising Justice AS Chandurkar and Justice Vrushali Joshi was hearing a number of petitions that challenged Rule 6 of the Consumer Protection Rules.

The Rule specifies that the Selection Committee is responsible for appointing the President and Members.

The Selection Committee is composed of the Chief Justice of the high court or an individual nominated by the Chief Justice to serve as the Chairman.

Additionally, the committee includes the secretary in charge of State Consumer Affairs and the Chief Secretary of the State government as its members.

The division bench of the high court noted that there was a lack of judicial dominance, which is considered a direct violation of the doctrine of the separation of powers and an intrusion into the judicial domain.

“We find that Rule 6(1) of the Rules of 2020 suffers from two infirmities; firstly with the Chairperson being the sole representative of the Judiciary in the three Member selection committee, there is lack of judicial dominance which has been held to be in direct contravention of the doctrine of separation of powers and also an encroachment on the judicial domain. Its present composition definitely results in excessive interference of the Executive in the appointment of President and members of the State Commission and the District Commission. It results in diluting the involvement of judiciary in the process of appointment of members of the Tribunals amounting to an encroachment by the executive on the judiciary,” the bench observed.

The petitions challenged the validity of the notification that established the selection committee.

As a result of the high court's decision striking down the notification, the selection committee will now make recommendations based on the 2019 rules.

In addition to contesting the constitution of the selection committee, some of the petitions also challenged the reduction in the tenure of the President and Members from 5 years to 4 years.

Mahendra Limaye & Ors vs Union of India & Ors