BHUPINDER KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges the validity of the appointment of Respondent Nos.4 to 7 as Presidents of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ('DCDRC'), under Sec. 10 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (CPA). The petition also prays for the striking down of Rule 5 (7) (b) and (c) of the Punjab Consumer Protection (Appointment, Salary, Allowances and Condition of Service of President and Members of the State Commission and the District Forum) Rules, 2018 (TCP Rules 2018') on the ground of it being ultra vires Sec. 30 read with Sec. 10 (1) (a) CPA as well as Rule 10 of the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 2007 (TSJS Rules').

(2.) The background to the present petition is that a notice dtd. 14/12/2018 was issued by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (SCDRC) inviting applications from suitable candidates for appointment to 11 posts of Presidents of DCDRCs in Punjab on whole time basis. The notice referred to Sec. 10 (1) (a) CPA in terms of which "a person who is, or has been, or is qualified to be a District Judge, shall be the President of the District Consumer Forum". The notice further specified as under:

(3.) Under the further sub-head of 'Qualifications' it was stated as under: