Page 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No. 2740 OF 2007

 STATE OF U P AND ORS                        .....APPELLANTS

VERSUS

ALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION  BAR ASSOCIATION                                                               .....RESPONDENT

With WRIT PETITION (C) No. 164 OF 2002  

J U D G M E N T

Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J

1 The deficiency of infrastructure in the adjudicatory fora constituted under  

the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has led to several directions of this Court  

in the course of the proceedings in this case.  On 14 January 2016, this Court

Page 2

2

constituted a Committee presided over by Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat, a former  

judge of this Court, to examine :    

(i) the  infrastructural  requirements  of  the  State  Commissions, deficiencies in infrastructure and remedial measures;  

(ii) the  position  of  vacancies  of  members  at  the  national,  state  and district level;  

(iii) the need for additional  Benches at  the  national,  state  and district level;  

(iv) conditions of eligibility for appointment of non-judicial members; (v) administrative powers which have been or should be conferred on

the presiding officers of the state and district fora;  (vi) service  conditions  including  pay  scales  governing  the  presiding

officers and members;  (vii) requirements of staff;  (viii) creation of a separate cadre of staff at the national, state and district

level; and  (ix) other relevant issues.

The Committee was requested, while examining these issues, to submit its

recommendations.  The Committee has since the commencement of its work

in February 2016 inquired extensively into the matters referred to it and has

made  an  assessment  of  the  prevailing  conditions  in  the  States  of  Orissa,

Maharashtra,  Punjab,  Haryana,  Andhra  Pradesh,  Telangana,  Jammu  and

Kashmir,  Tamil  Nadu,  Bihar  and  Jharkhand.  The  Committee  has  also

analysed the prevailing position at the National Consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission, as well as the State Commission in New Delhi.  

Page 3

3

2 The facts which have emerged from the interim report submitted by the

Committee on 17 October 2016 constitute a sobering reflection of how far

removed reality lies from the goals and objectives which Parliament had in

view while enacting the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The Committee has

observed that  the fora constituted under the enactment do not  function as

effectively as expected due to a poor organizational set up, grossly inadequate

infrastructure,  absence  of  adequate  and  trained  manpower  and  lack  of

qualified  members  in  the  adjudicating  bodies.   Benches  of  the  state  and

district fora sit, in many cases for barely two or three hours every day and

remain non-functional for months due to a lack of coram.  Orders are not

enforced like other orders passed by the civil courts.  The state governments

have failed to respond to the suggestions of the Committee for streamlining

the state of affairs.

3 The pathetic  state  of infrastructure is made evident  in the following

findings in the report of the Committee :                   

“The Committee, during its visits to states, has found that there are no proper court-rooms with lights and fans, chairs and tables. The condition of Chambers of the Presiding Members is pathetic. They do not have adequate  or  trained  staff.  They  do  not  have stenographers  for  taking  dictations.  At  some Consumer Fora, there are no peons to retrieve the files

Page 4

4

from the Record Room. The Record-Rooms are, also, either  too  small  and  have  no  almirah,  shelves  or compactors  to  keep  the  files.  The  files  are  kept  in open  and  get  misplaced  or  eaten  by  termites.  The Central Government provides funds for construction of  the  new  buildings,  carrying  out additions/alterations/renovations of existing buildings and grant  for  acquiring  non-building  assets  such as furnitures,  office  equipments  etc.  The  State Governments  have  to  provide  the  land  for construction of new buildings for the Consumer Fora. The Committee has noted that the State Governments have  not  been  quick  enough  to  allot  land  for construction  of  Consumer  Fora  in  their  respective States.  It  has,  also,  come  to  the  notice  of  the Committee that the State Governments – responsible for timely filling up of the vacancies of the Presidents and Members in the State Commissions and District Fora of the states, have failed to keep the time limit. The Committee has come across instances where the State Governments  have taken upto 7/10 months to approve  the  recommendations  of  the  Selection Committee”.   

The quality of presiding members, especially of non-judicial members at the

state and district levels is poor.  One of the reasons is that the remuneration

which is being paid to non-judicial members of consumer fora varies from

state  to  state  and  is  too  meager  to  attract  qualified  talent.   Most  of  the

non-judicial  members  are  not  even  capable  of  writing  or  dictating  small

orders.   At  certain  places  non-judicial  members  act  in  unison against  the

presiding  officer,  while  passing  orders  contrary  to  law,  damaging  the

Page 5

5

reputation of the adjudicating body.  Presidents, as a result, prefer a situation

where such non-judicial members absent themselves from work if only so

that judicial work can be carried out by the presiding judge impartially and

objectively.  Many non-judicial  members do not  maintain punctuality  and

others attend to work sporadically once or twice a week.  The Committee has

observed that that the problem lies in – (i) absence of proper remuneration;

(ii) appointment of former judicial officers who lack motivation and zeal; (iii)

appointment of practicing lawyers as presiding officers of district fora; and

(iv)  political  and bureaucratic  interference in  appointments.   Many of  the

non-judicial members attend to the place of work only to sign orders which

have been drafted by the presiding officer.

4 The Committee has furnished concrete examples of how bureaucratic

and political influence has marred the selection process as a result of which

the functioning of consumer fora is detrimentally affected.  Three instances

furnished in the Report of the Committee provided a telling example of the

state of affairs :       

“15).  The Committee could make out that there has been  considerable  bureaucratic  and  political influence/interference  in  the  ‘selection  process’ and functioning of the Consumer Fora. Just to cite a few instances,  the  Committee  found  that  relatives  of

Page 6

6

politicians,  bureaucrats  and  judicial  fraternity  have been  selected.  A  non-Judicial  Member  Mr.  Jamal Akhtar  posted  at  District  Forum  Meerut  has  been absenting without  permission since 11.05.2015.  The State Government has failed to take any action against him.  Even the  plea  of  President,  State  Commission has gone unheeded. The result is that his post has not been  declared  vacant  and  another  non-Judicial Member  posted  elsewhere  has  been attached in  his place.  

16). One non-Judicial Member who had her first term at Lucknow and has now been enjoying her Second Term,  having  been  appointed  for  District  Forum Barabanki but has been attached to Greater Noida and as per the reports, comes to Forum once or twice a week.  Another  woman  non-Judicial  Member  who happens to be wife of a bureaucrat was appointed for District  Forum  Baghpat  but  was  attached/posted  at Greater  Noida.  These few instances  make it  crystal clear  that  there  is  definite  political  influence  and interference  and  in  such  a  scenario,  the  work  of District  Consumer  Fora  is  affected  as  it  results  in lowering the morale of the President.  

17).  In  Haryana,  a  non-Judicial  Woman  Member did/does  not  attend the  District  Forum regularly, as she has to travel around 150/160 KM everyday. The President of one District Forum who happens to be former President of Bar Association has been serving the  second  term  as  President.  Such  non-Judicial Members  manage  to  get  selected  and  then  misuse their  position  as  Members,  as  they  call  themselves ‘Judges’.”

The selection of persons as presiding officers and as members of the fora

lacks transparency without a fixed criteria for selection.  The Committee has,

in  our  view  with  justification,  proposed  that  a  written  test  should  be

Page 7

7

conducted to assess the knowledge of persons who apply for posts in the

district fora.  Issues of conflict of interest also arise when persons appointed

from a local area are appointed to a district forum in the same area.

5 The  position  of  the  National  Consumer  Disputes  Redressal

Commission has emerged from the interactions of the Committee with the

President  and  members  of  the  Commission.   The  serious  deficiencies  of

infrastructure are summarized below :  

(i) Sanctioned  strength  of  personnel  is  far  lower  than  the  actual

requirement  and  is  not  based  on  the  pendency  of  cases  or  on

objective norms adopted by statutory organizations;  (ii) There are 118 sanctioned posts as against a requirement of 322 while

pendency of cases as on 30 September 2016 is 11,379;  (iii) Few  personnel  work  on  a  regular  basis  while  others  who  are

inducted  on  contract  cannot  be  entrusted  with  work  of  a  regular

nature; (iv) The sanctioned strength of six Assistants, ten UDCs and eight LDCs

to attend on the administrative side to judicial filing, establishment

work and to the general administration is totally inadequate; (v) The strength of members has increased from five in 2003 to twelve

at  present  without  a  corresponding  increase  in  supporting  staff

though the average monthly institution of original  complaints has

increased by 300 per cent; and

Page 8

8

(vi) Though  the  proposal  for  the  creation  of  posts  was  sent  to  the

Government of India in 2010, only a few posts for catering to the

requirement of a sixth Bench (presently there are five) have been

sanctioned.  The Committee has recommended that at least 51 posts

be created immediately as an interim measure.

The  Committee  has  noted  that  while  the  salary  and  allowances  of  the

President of the National Commission are equivalent to those of a Judge of

the Supreme Court,  the conditions of service of members of the National

Commission are not at par with those of the sitting judges of the High Court.

The National Commission hears appeals and revisions against orders of the

State Commissions, whose Presidents are treated at par with judges of the

High Court.  An anomalous  situation prevails  where  members  of  a  higher

forum (the National Commission) have conditions of service inferior to those

applicable to members of a forum lower in hierarchy. The Committee has

proposed that the members of the National Commission should get the same

salaries,  allowances  and  conditions  of  services  as  are  available  to  sitting

judges of the High Court.

6 The  Committee  has  opined  that  it  is  necessary  to  confer  upon  the

President of the National Commission the power to recruit and transfer staff,

Page 9

9

to  obviate  delay  in  appointments.   Exemption from consultation  with  the

UPSC  should,  it  is  proposed,  be  granted  as  in  the  case  of  several  other

statutory tribunals, such as CAT, AFT and NGT.

7 The posts of President and members of the State Commission in Tamil

Nadu and Jammu & Kashmir are lying vacant for more than one year.  The

Committee was assured by the Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Tamil

Nadu on 31 May 2016 that these appointments would be cleared within a

short period.  However, until the date of the report, no steps have been taken.

The Government of Jammu & Kashmir has failed to appoint the President of

the State Commission.   

8 The  Committee  has  formulated  its  suggestions  to  the  Central

Government in Annexure A and the directions which it has issued to the state

governments in Annexures B to M to the report.  

9 The interim report of the Committee provides an unfortunate reflection

of the state of affairs in the consumer fora at the district, state and national

level.   That  these  bodies  which  are  vested  with  important  functions  of  a

judicial  nature  continue  to  work  despite  the  prevalence  of  such  adverse

conditions  and  in  the  face  of  the  apathy  of  the  governments  both  at  the

Page 10

10

national and state level is a matter which requires immediate intervention by

this Court.  A systemic overhaul of the entire infrastructure is necessary if the

Consumer  Protection  Act,  1986  is  not  to  become a  dead  letter.  With  the

proliferation of goods and services in a rapidly growing economy, Parliament

envisaged  the  enactment  to  be  the  corner-stone  of  a  vibrant  consumer

movement.  Reality has been distant from the aspirations of the law.  Since

the  state  of  affairs  which  has  been  revealed  before  the  Court  warrants

systemic changes, we propose to initially issue directions on certain specific

issues in the present order within a judicially manageable framework.  We

will now take up each of the issues seriatim so as to enable the court to focus

on  each  problem  and  on  the  nature  of  the  malady  before  proceeding  to

formulate the directions :

(1) Administrative control :

One of the principal problems governing the functioning of the district fora

on the one hand and the State Commissions on the other hand is the absence

of  clarity in regard to the exercise of administrative and disciplinary control.

Section 24B provides for administrative control, in the following terms :   

“24B.  Administrative  control.  –  (1)  The  National Commission shall have administrative control over all

Page 11

11

the  State  Commissions  in  the  following  matters, namely :-

(i) calling   for  periodical  return  regarding  the  institution, disposal, pendency of cases;

(ii) issuance  of  instructions  regarding  adoption  of  uniform procedure in the hearing of matters, prior service of copies of documents produced by one party to the opposite parties, furnishing  of  English  translation  of  judgments  written  in any language, speedy grant of copies of documents;

(iii) generally  overseeing  the  functioning  of  the  State Commissions  or  the  District  Fora  to  ensure  that  the objects and purposes of the Act are best served without in any way interfering with their quasi-judicial freedom.

(2)  The  State  Commission  shall  have administrative  control  over  all  the  District  Fora within its jurisdiction in all matters referred to in sub-section (1)”.                         (emphasis supplied)

Clause  (iii)  of  sub-section  (1)  of  Section  24B confers  upon  the  National

Commission  the  power  of  administrative  control  over  all  the  State

Commissions to generally oversee the functioning of the State Commissions

or the district fora to ensure that the objects and purposes of the Act are best

served.   However,  this  is  to  be  achieved  without  interfering  with  the

quasi-judicial freedom of the State Commissions and the district fora.  Under

sub-section (2) the State Commission is conferred with administrative control

over all the district fora within its jurisdiction in all matters referred to in

sub-section  (1),  which  will  necessarily  cover  clause  (iii).   The  power  of

administrative  control  which  has  been  conferred  upon  the  National

Page 12

12

Commission  in  relation  to  the  State  Commissions  and  upon  the  State

Commissions in relation to the district fora is an entrustment with a purpose;

the object being to oversee the functioning of the forum, which is subject to

its administrative control so as to ensure that it is an effective instrument of

rendering  justice  to  consumers.  The  power  of  administrative  control  is

couched in wide terms.  The power would include overseeing the functioning

of the State Commissions and the district fora in all administrative matters.

This would include the posting of and control over members, appointment of

and  control  over  manpower,  provision  of  adequate  infrastructure  and  the

streamlining of all administrative matters (except the exercise of the judicial

power in deciding complaints, appeals and revisions).  The difficulties which

have been encountered in the proper functioning of the district fora and the

State Commissions can be obviated in a large measure once the true ambit of

Section 24B is construed, by vesting full powers of an administrative nature

in the National Commission (in relation to the State Commissions) and in the

State Commissions (in relation to district fora).  In the National Commission,

the exercise of administrative authority over the State Commissions shall be

vested in the President.  Similarly, in the State Commissions the exercise of

administrative control over the district fora shall be vested in the President.

Page 13

13

(2) Rule making powers :  

Rule making powers under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are embodied

in Section 30 which provides as follows :  

“30. Power to make rules.- (1) The Central

Government may, by notification, make rules for carrying out the provisions contained in clause (a) of  sub-section  (1)  of  section  2,  clause  (b)  of sub-section  (2)  of  section  4,  sub-section  (2)  of section 5, sub-section (2) of section 12, clause (vi) of sub-section  (4)  of  section  13,  clause  (hb)  of sub-section (1) of section 14, section 19, clause (b) of  sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of section 20, section 22 and section 23 of this Act.

(2)  The  State  Government  may,  by  notification, make  rules  for  carrying  out  the  provisions contained  in  clause  (b)  of  sub-section  (2)  and sub-section  (4)  of  section  7,  clause  (b)  of sub-section (2) and sub-section (4) of Section 8A, clause (b) of sub-section (1) and sub-section(3) of section 10, clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 13,  clause (hb) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (3)  of  section  14,  section  15  and  clause  (b)  of sub-section (1) and  sub-section (2) of section 16 of this Act.”

The  composition  of  the  district  fora  is  provided  in  Section  10  while  the

composition of  the  State  Commissions  is  provided in  Section 16.  Section

10(3) provides as follows :

“10.

Page 14

14

       …

(3)  The  salary  or  honorarium and other  allowances payable  to,  and  the  other  terms  and  conditions  of service of the members of the District Forum shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government:

[Provided  that  the  appointment  of  a  member  on whole-time  basis  shall  be  made  by  the  State Government on the recommendation of the President of  the  State  Commission  taking  into  consideration such factors as may be prescribed including the work load of the District Forum.]

   The  pension  received  by  the  presidents  of  the District Consumer Forum in respect of their previous services  as  District  Judges  is  subject  to  deduction from  their  salary  as  president  of  the  Forum  fixed under provisions of the Act.”

In relation to the State Commissions sub-section (2) of Section 16 provides as

follows:   

“16.

    …

(2)  The  salary  or  honorarium and other  allowances payable to, and the other terms and

conditions  of  service  of,  the  members  of  the  State Commission shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government.

[Provided  that  the  appointment  of  a  member  on whole-time  basis  shall  be  made  by  the  State Government on the recommendation of the President of  the  State  Commission  taking  into  consideration such factors as may be prescribed including the work load of the State Commission.]”

Page 15

15

Hence, the state governments are required under sub-section (3) of Section 10

and  under  sub-section  (2)  of  Section  16  to  prescribe  the  salary  or,

honorarium, allowances and the other terms and conditions of service of the

members of the district fora and of the State Commission.  

10 Section 10 provides for composition of the district forum. Clause (b) of

sub-section  (1)  of  Section  10 stipulates  the  appointment  of  two members

(apart  from the  President,  who is  to  be  or  should  have  been  or  must  be

qualified to be a district judge).  Section 10(1)(b) is as follows:  

“  Composition of the District Forum :

(1) Each District Forum shall consist of …

(b).  two  other  members,  one  of  whom  shall  be  a woman, who shall have the following qualifications, namely:-

(i) be not less than thirty-five years of age,

(ii)  possess  a  bachelor’s  degree  from  a  recognized university,

(iii) be persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have adequate knowledge and experience of at least ten  years  in  dealing  with  problems  relating  to economics,  law,  commerce,  accountancy,  industry, public affairs or administration.”   

Section  16(1)(b)  provides  for  appointment  of  the  members  of  the  State

Commission (apart from the president who is to be or should have been a

Page 16

16

judge of the High Court).  Section 16(1)(b) in so far as is material provides as

follows :  

“16. Composition of the State Commission :

(1) Each State Commission shall consist of –  

      ...

16(1)(b) Each State Commission shall consist of not less  than  two,  and  not  more  than  such  number  of members,  as  may be  prescribed,  and one  of  whom shall  be  a  woman,  who  shall  have  the  following qualifications, namely :-

(i) be not less than thirty-five years of age;

(ii)possess  a  bachelor’s  degree  from  a  recognised university; and

(iii) be persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have adequate knowledge and experience of at least ten  years  in  dealing  with  problems  relating  to economics,  law,  commerce,  accountancy,  industry, public affairs or administration.”

11 The Central government is vested with rule making power in relation to

Section  20(1)(b)  –  relating  to  appointments  of  members  of  the  National

Commission under Section 30. The rule making power with reference to the

provisions of Section 10(1)(b)  and Section 16(1)(b) is  vested in  the State

government under Section 30.  The difficulty arises because the vesting of the

rule making power in the state governments in this manner may result in a

lack of uniformity of rules across the country, both in regard to the terms and

Page 17

17

conditions of service as well as in regard to the modalities to be followed in

ensuring that persons appointed as members fulfill the qualifications which

are prescribed. Both in relation to the State Commissions and the district fora,

a member must be a person of ability and standing with adequate knowledge

and experience  of  at  least  ten  years  in  dealing  with  problems relating  to

economics,  law,  commerce,  accountancy,  industry,  public  affairs  or

administration.   These  are  broad  general  categories.   There  can  be  no

gainsaying  the  importance  of  adopting  unified  standards  and  objective

processes  of  selection  from a  national  perspective.  This  would  ensure  an

objective  formulation  of  norms and  their  uniform application  in  different

states in the country.  In the absence of a uniform pattern, the result is a wide

variation in standards and a great deal of subjectivity, and bureaucratic and

political interference, which has been noticed in the reports submitted by the

Committee  to  this  Court.  The  Committee  which  has  looked  at  the  entire

matter in perspective consists of a former judge of this Court, a former judge

of the Delhi High Court, and the Secretary to the Union Government in the

Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution.  The findings of

the Committee in the interim report are entitled to deference.

Page 18

18

12 In these circumstances, we hold that Section 24B vests administrative

control  over  the  State  Commissions  in  the  President  of  the  National

Commission  and  over  the  district  fora  in  the  Presidents  of  the  State

Commissions.  The extent of the administrative control shall be in all matters

relating to the administrative functioning of the forum concerned including

but not limited to assignment of judicial and administrative work; posting,

transfer and control over members; selection, appointment and disciplinary

matters relating to the staff of the district fora and State Commissions and in

relation provisioning and meeting the infrastructural requirements of those

bodies.  The requirements of infrastructure shall be met in coordination with

the Departments of Consumer Affairs of the states concerned and, in relation

to  the  National  Commission  in  coordination  with  the  Union  Ministry  of

Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution.   

13 We also  direct  the  Union  Government  to  frame  model  rules  with

reference to the provisions of Section 10(1)(b) and Section 10(2) and Section

16(1)(b) and Section 16(2), within four months from today. The model rules

so framed shall be placed before this Court for its approval.  After the model

rules are approved by this Court, the state governments shall while exercising

Page 19

19

their rule making authority with reference to the provisions of Section 10(1)

(b)  and Section 16(1)(b)  and with reference to the  provisions of Sections

10(3) and 16(2) frame rules in conformity with the model rules.  Existing

rules, if any, shall have to be brought in conformity with the model rules.

14 Under Section 30(A)(1) the National Commission is empowered, with

the previous approval of the Central Government, to frame regulations not

inconsistent with the Act to provide for all matters for which provision is

necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of

the Act.  It is necessary for the National Commission to frame regulations

expeditiously to give effect to its administrative control under Section 24B.

The Regulations shall  inter alia extend to ensuring the effective exercise of

administrative  control  by  the  National  Commission  over  the  State

Commissions and by the latter over the district fora.   

15 Under  Section  24B  the  adjudicatory  fora  under  the  Consumer

Protection  Act,  1986  have  been  constituted  to  resolve  complaints  of

consumers  about:  (i)  unfair  or  restrictive  trade  practices  by  traders  and

service providers; (ii) defects in goods purchased or agreed to be purchased;

and (iii) deficiencies in the provision of services availed of or hired.

Page 20

20

Against  the  decision  of  the  district  forum  upon  an  original  complaint  a

remedy  of  an  appeal  is  provided  to  the  State  Commission.   The  State

Commission also has jurisdiction where the amount claimed is in excess of

Rupees twenty lakhs (complaints below that amount lie before the district

fora)  and  upto  Rupees  one  crore.   Appeals  from  orders  of  the  State

Commission  lie  to  the  National  Commission.    Apart  from  its  appellate

jurisdiction the National Commission has the power to entertain complaints

where  the  value  of  goods  or  services  and  compensation  sought  exceeds

Rupees one crore.  The Committee has noted that in the Consumer Protection

Bill, 2015 the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district fora is to be enhanced to

Rupees one crore.  The proposed expansion of pecuniary limits requires the

strengthening of the quality of adjudication in the district fora.  Members of

the forum must be aware of the responsibility vested in them as adjudicating

officers.  There is a need to ensure checks and balances.  The work which is

performed  by  the  consumer  fora  constituted  in  the  three  tier  hierarchy

provided under law is of a judicial nature.  The district forum is vested with

powers of a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying

a suit in respect of various matters set out in Section 13(4).  These provisions

apply  to  the  State  Commission  under  Section  18  and  to  the  National

Page 21

21

Commission  under  Section  22.   Both  having  regard  to  the  significant

adjudicatory powers that are conferred upon the fora constituted under the

Act  and  particularly  in  the  context  of  the  observations  contained  in  the

interim report of the Committee, we have come to the conclusion that the

above  directions  are  necessary  to  inculcate  a  sense  of  discipline  and

accountability amongst the members of the fora constituted under the Act.

16 The Committee has sought the directions of this Court specifically in

the following terms :  

“a) The state of Tamil Nadu be directed to appoint the President and Members of the State Commission at the earliest; b)  The  State  of  Jammu  &  Kashmir  be  directed  to appoint  the  President  and  Member  of  the  State Commission at the earliest; and c)  The  State  of  Uttar  Pradesh  be  directed  to  take appropriate  disciplinary  action  against  Mr.  Jamal Akhtar, non-judicial member of District Forum for his unauthorized absence for over a year, forthwith.”

We find justification in this request of the Committee.  The reliefs mentioned

in (a) and (b) above are allowed.  A copy of this order shall be served on the

Chief Secretaries  respectively of the  States  of  Tamil  Nadu and Jammu &

Kashmir for compliance within a period of two months from the receipt of a

copy.  As regards prayer (c), the President of the State Commission in Uttar

Page 22

22

Pradesh shall cause a notice to be served upon Shri Jamal Akhtar posted at

the  district  forum,  Meerut,  who  has  been  absenting  himself  without

permission allegedly since 11 May 2015.  The Committee has noted that the

state government has failed to take action against him and even the plea of

the President of the State Commission has gone unheeded.  We order and

direct that the President of the State Commission shall upon the issuance of a

notice  to  show  cause  to  Shri  Jamal  Akhtar  and  after  furnishing  him  an

opportunity  of  submitting  his  explanation  submit  a  report  to  the  state

government, preferably within one month from the receipt of a copy of this

order.  The  state  government  shall  thereupon  pass  necessary  orders  in

accordance with law no later  than within a fortnight  of  the receipt of  the

report of the President of the State Commission.

17 The Committee has annexed to its report at Annexures B to M copies of

the letters issued by it to the Chief Secretaries to the governments of Orissa,

NCT  of  Delhi,  Haryana,  Punjab,  Union  Territory  of  Chandigarh,  Bihar,

Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra  Pradesh and   Telegana on 14

October  2016 for rectification of deficiencies in infrastructure and resolution

of various aspects.   By the order of this Court dated 14 January 2016 the

Page 23

23

Committee  was  permitted  to  forward  its  recommendations  to  each  state

government concerned for appropriate steps in a time bound manner.  A copy

of the recommendations was directed to be submitted to this Court to enable

it to issue directions should the recommendations not be implemented by the

state  governments.  Since  the  recommendations  have  been  made  after  a

detailed inspection and in the interests of facilitating a proper implementation

of the provisions of the Act, we hereby direct each of the state governments

concerned to  implement  the  recommendations  of  the  Committee  within  a

period  of  three  months.  The  Secretary  to  the  Committee  is  requested  to

forward a copy of this order to the Chief Secretaries concerned to secure

compliance as directed.

18 Hence  in  terms  of  the  above  discussion  we  issue  the  following

directions :

(i) The  Union  Government  shall  for  the  purpose  of  ensuring

uniformity in the exercise of the rule making power under Section 10(3)

and Section  16(2)  of  the  Consumer  Protection  Act,  1986 frame model

rules  for  adoption by the  state  governments.  The  model  rules  shall  be

framed within four months and shall  be submitted to this Court for its

approval;

Page 24

24

(ii) The  Union  Government  shall  also  frame  within  four  months

model rules prescribing objective norms for implementing the provisions

of Section 10(1)(b), Section 16(1)(b) and Section 20(1)(b) in regard to the

appointment  of  members  respectively  of  the  District  fora,  State

Commissions and National Commission;   

(iii) The Union Government shall while framing the model rules have

due regard to the formulation of objective norms for the assessment of the

ability,  knowledge  and  experience  required  to  be  possessed  by  the

members  of  the  respective  fora  in  the  domain  areas  referred  to  in  the

statutory provisions mentioned above. The model rules shall provide for

the payment of salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of the

members  of  the  consumer  fora  commensurate  with  the  nature  of

adjudicatory  duties  and  the  need  to  attract  suitable  talent  to  the

adjudicating bodies. These rules shall be finalized upon due consultation

with  the  President  of  the  National  Consumer  Disputes  Redressal

Commission, within the period stipulated above;

(iv) Upon  the  approval  of  the  model  rules  by  this  Court,  the  state

governments  shall  proceed  to  adopt  the  model  rules  by  framing

appropriate rules in the exercise of the rule making powers under

Section 30 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986;          (v) The  National  Consumer  Disputes  Redressal  Commission  is

requested  to  formulate  regulations  under  Section  30A  with  the

previous  approval  of  the  Central  Government  within  a  period  of

three  months  from  today  in  order  to  effectuate  the  power  of

Page 25

25

administrative control vested in the National Commission over the

State Commissions under Section 24(B)(1)(iii) and in respect of the

administrative  control  of  the State  Commissions over  the  District

fora in terms of Section 24(B)(2) as explained in this Judgment to

effectively  implement  the  objects  and  purposes  of  the  Consumer

Protection Act, 1986.

19 The proceedings shall now be listed before this Court on 7 March 2017,

for further directions and for reporting compliance.  

          .......................................CJI

                              [T S  THAKUR]  

      ..........................................J                     [Dr D Y  CHANDRACHUD]

                ...........................................J                   [L NAGESWARA RAO]

New Delhi November 21, 2016.