Review plea in SC challenges norms on posting of consumer commission office-bearers

A review petition has been filed before the Supreme Court, challenging its judgment of May 21 on the appointment, eligibility, selection and tenure of the president and members of the State and District Consumer Commissions.

The petition was filed by Parivarthan, a Kerala-based NGO that is dedicated to promoting good governance, rule of law and consumer protection. The plea challenges the May 21 apex court judgment on the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020 on the appointment and other aspects of the president and members of these commissions.

The petition expresses serious concerns about the directives on the appointment, eligibility, selection, and tenure of presidents and members of the State and District Consumer Commissions, as mentioned in the judgment. Restricting eligibility for the post of president of the district commission to serving or retired district judges excludes qualified and experienced advocates, who are otherwise eligible under Article 233(2) of the Constitution. Likewise, imposing mandatory written examinations even for the reappointment of non-judicial members is described as disproportionate and disruptive to continuity in office, it says.

The petition says that while Article 142 of the Constitution grants wide powers to the Supreme Court, it does not permit the prescribing of substantive qualifications or powers to direct the Union government to legislate while “strictly adhering” to judicial directions. This is because it would intrude into the legislative domain. Such directions, the petition stresses, compromise the principle of separation of powers, and risk setting an unhealthy constitutional precedent.

The petition further emphasises that judicial directions cannot substitute legislative or executive functions, as this undermines the autonomy of the legislature, and dilutes the institutional balance envisaged by the Constitution.

Through the review petition, Parivarthan has sought reconsideration and modification of the impugned directions of the Supreme Court. This petition is to uphold constitutional propriety and maintain institutional balance, besides to ensure that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is implemented in line with its true objectives, it says.