STATE OF U P THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. versus ALL U. P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION

Citation: [2017] 12 S.C.R. 492 · Decided: 15-12-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA, D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, A.M. KHANWILKAR · Disposal: Directions issued
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 12 S.C.R. 492 
A 
STATE OF U P THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
v. 
ALL U. P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
(Civil Appeal No. 2740 of2007) 
DECEMBER 15, 2017 
[DIPAK MISRA, CJI, A.M. KHANWILKAR AND 
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, .J.J.] 
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - ss. IO( l)(b), IO(J), 16(l)(b), 
16(2), 20(1 )(b), 248(1 )(iii), 248(2), JO and JOA - Consumer fora -
Paucity of infrastructure - Supreme Court had on 14-01-2016 
constituted a three member committee to examine the following 
aspects in the National Commission, State Commissions and the 
District Fora: ( 1) the infrastructure requirements; (2) the vacancy 
position of President/Members/ Presiding officers; (J) Need for 
additional benches, having regard to the workload and difficulties/ 
inconvenience which consumer dispute litigant has to face; (4) · 
conditions of eligibility, if prescribed, for appointment as non-
judicial members; (5) The nature and extent of Administrative· 
Powers, if any, conferred upon the Presidents of the State 
Commissions and the President of the District Fora; (6) The service 
conditions currently applicable including pay-scales admissible to 
President and Members, Judicial/Non-judicial; (7) The minimum staff 
required; (8) Desirability and feasibility of creating separate cadre 
for staff; (9) Any other aspect that the Committee may consider 
relevant to make the Consumer Disputes Fora/Commissions more 
effective, efficient ~md their process speedy - Thereafter, Court 
issued directions on 2 l-ll-16 to the Union Gol'ernment to frame 
model rules (i) for ensuring uniformity in the exercise of the rule 
making power uls.lO(J) and s.16(2) of the Act, for adoption by the 
State governments; (ii) for prescribing objective norms for 
implementing the provisions of s.10(1 )(b), s.16(1 )(b) and s.20(1 )(b) 
in regard to appointment of the members; and (iii) for payment of 
salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of the members 
- It was further directed that upon approval of model rules by the 
Court, the State government shall proceed to adopt the model rules 
by framing appropriate rules u/s.30 of the Act - NCDRC requested 
to formulate regulations uls. JOA with the previous approval of the 
492 
STATE OF U P THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. v. 
493 
ALL U.P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
Central Government in order to effectuate the power of A 
administrative control vested in the National Commission over the 
State Commissions u/s. 24(B)( /)(iii) and in respect of administrative 
control of the State Commissions over the District fora in terms of 
s.24(8)(2) to effecti11ely implement the objects and purposes of the 
Act - Directions now issued to the Union government to file a 
B 
comprehensive status report indicating the compliance with the 
directions issued on 21-11-16 by the Court - Meanwhile, three 
member Committee appointed by the Court filed its report, hence, 
completed its task - The Committee stands closed - ASG to assist 
the Court in formulating appropriate directions to ensure that proper 
infrastructure is made available at all levels of the consumer fora 
C 
across the country - Proceedings adjourned. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2740 
of2007. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.10.1998 of the High Court 
of Judicature at Allahabad in CMWP No. 968of1997 
D 
WITH 
Writ Petition (Civil) No.164 of2002. 
Ankur Prakash, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Ranjan Mukherjee, 
V. N. Raghupathy, Advs for the Appellants. 
Maninder Singh, ASG, Edward Belho, AAG, R. Balasubramanian, 
Shekhar Vyas, Santosh Kr. Vishwakarma, Prabhas Bajaj, Ms. Aarti 
Sharma, Ms. Niranjana Singh, Harish Kr. Ikhinchi, Ms. Gargi Khanna, 
S. Wasim A. Qadri, Raj Bhadur, Mrs. D. Bharathi Reddy, Ms. C. K. 
Sucharita, S. Srinivasan, Mis. Corporate Law Group, Anil Shrivastav, 
Gopal Singh, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms. Puja Singh, 
Ms. Mamta Singh, Ms. Shodhika Sharma, T.N. Rama Rao, Hitesh Kumar 
Sharma, T. Veera Reddy, T. V. George, G. Prakash, V. N. Raghupathy, 
B. S. Banthia, Ranjan Mukherjee, R. Sathish, Ms. Sumita Hazarika, 
R. Gopalakrishnan, Radha Shyam Jena, Kuldip Singh, Sun ii Kumar Jain, 
Ms. Aruna Mathur, Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, 
Ms. Simran Jeet, Mis. Arputham Aruna And Co,. Tara Chandra Sharma, 
Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Ms. A. Subhashini, 
Kamini Jaiswal, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, V. G. Pragasam, S. Prabu 
Ramasubramanian, S. Manuraj, Mi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.