Supreme Court instructs Centre to submit an affidavit on the viability of a permanent forum for consumer dispute resolution

Under the 2020 Rules, the tenure for Presidents and Members of State and District Commissions was set at 4 years. However, the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India and Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank held the tenure must be at least 5 years.

A PIL challenged Rules 3(2) (b), 4(2) (c), and 6(9), which were declared unconstitutional. In Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs v. Dr. Mahindra Bhaskar Limaye (2023) [Limaye – I], the Supreme Court ruled that the experience requirement for Non-Judicial Members—20 and 15 years—was arbitrary, and 10 years was sufficient.

Following this, Maharashtra state invited applications under the updated criteria. Three writ petitions contested Rules 6(1) and 10(2), as well as the advertisement and associated notifications. The 2023 Rules were notified incorporating Limaye – I directions, 112 persons were appointed, but reappointment requests were rejected.

The Bombay High Court partly allowed the petitions, struck down Rules 6(1) and 10(2), and quashed related notifications and advertisements regarding Paper II. The case then moved to the Supreme Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court noted the absence of a clear mechanism like Article 227 for Consumer fora and suggested increasing their strength. It allowed Review Petitions clarifying that no written exam or viva voce is required for selection to posts, upheld the Bombay High Court’s striking down of Rule 6(1) due to executive dominance and separation of powers, and affirmed quashing related notifications.

The Court also upheld the invalidation of Rule 10(2) on tenure, consistent with legal principles. It criticized petitioners for challenging the selection after participating but validated the process and appointments, finding no malpractice.

For reappointments, candidates have no vested right but must be considered under new Rules, with exams waived for Presidents and Judicial Members but required for Non-Judicial and District Members. Pending writ petitions must be decided per this judgment.

Court’s Directions
The Supreme Court directed the Union to notify new Rules within 4 months, mandating: a 5-year tenure; a judicial majority in the Selection Committee; no exams for Presidents and Judicial Members; and exams only for Non-Judicial and District Commission Members, to be conducted with State Service Commissions. It upheld limiting District Commission Presidents to serving or retired District Judges.

States must complete recruitment within 4 months of the new Rules. Appointments made under this judgment will have a 4-year tenure and won’t receive the 5-year benefit. The ruling applies prospectively, with exceptions. The Court disposed of the cases, partly setting aside the impugned order and issuing directions.

Cause Title- Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukar and Ors. v. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 752)