STATE OF KERALA Vs. SAMUEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State of Kerala calls for interpretation of S.10(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act). The sub-section reads thus:

(2.) Learned single Judge before whom this question came up first has held that the term of five years mentioned in the sub-section is restricted to membership in one District Forum and if the same person is appointed in another District Forum he would become entitled to hold office for another term of five years on the strength of such subsequent appointment. As the said interpretation is not acceptable to the State of Kerala, this appeal has been filed under S.5 of the Kerala High Court Act.

(3.) Facts of this case lie in a narrow compass. Respondent holds office as President of the Kottayam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short the District Forum). He was appointed as member of the District Forum of some other Districts on 2-2-1990 and he assumed charge as such on 5-3-1990. While so he was appointed as President of the District Forum of Kottayam on 3-10-1991 and he assumed office of the same on 25-10-1991. Government of Kerala have made certain entries in Ext. P7 which is the register containing "personal particulars of the President and Members of Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum". In column No.7 relating to "date of retirement in Ext. P7 the date 4-3-1995 is shown as the date of retirement of the respondent. He questioned it A representation was made by the respondent to the Government for correction of the said date as 24-10-1996. But Government declined to do so and hence he filed the Original Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus directing the Government to effect such correction in Ext. P7.