ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. THRU AUTHORIZED AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION THRU REGISTRAR & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in both these writ petitions is the same, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions are being decided by the common judgment and order which follows:

(2.) In both these writ petitions under challenge are the orders passed by the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (herein after referred to as the 'State Commission'). The grounds of challenge in both these writ petitions are the same and the primary ground urged to impeach the orders passed by the State Commission is that the impugned orders have been passed by the President of the State Commission sitting single which is contrary to the provisions contained in Section 18, read with Section 14(2) and Section 16 (1-B) (i)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after referred to as '1986 Act').

(3.) Heard Sri Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Anurag Singh and Sri Ashish Kumar Pathak for the petitioners. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Sri Rahul Shukla has made his submission on behalf of the State Commission in opposition to the arguments made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both these writ petitions.