MITHLESH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 29.01.2015 whereby his representation against non -appointment to the post of the Member (Female) in District Consumer Redressal Forum, Sawaimadhopur despite recommendation of the select committee under Section 10(1A) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter "the Act of 1986") has been rejected for the reason that it purportedly lay within the sole discretion of the State Government not to appoint a member despite the recommendations of the select committee.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the advertisement dated 08.07.2013 inter alia for the post of Member (Female) in District Disputes Redressal Forums Sawaimadhopur, she applied. Having been called for interview on 06.09.2013, the petitioner appeared, was found suitable by the select committee and recommended for appointment. Yet the appointment was not forthcoming despite several months lapsing. An application under the Right To Information Act, 2005 on the issue elicited a reply on 04.03.2014 from the State Government that albeit the statutory select committee had recommended the petitioner for appointment to the post of Member (Female) in District Disputes Redressal Forums Sawaimadhopur, yet she was not appointed as the State Government had not thought it fit to approve the recommendation. A demand of justice dated 25.03.2014 at the instance of the petitioner through her counsel, in the circumstances followed but remained unaddressed. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by SBCWP No. 5527/2014. Vide order dated 10.10.2014, this Court allowed the petitioner to represent to the respondents and disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation within six weeks. A representation dated 04.12.2014 at the instance of the petitioner followed, was farcically considered, it is submitted, and has been dismissed vide order dated 29.01.2015. Hence this petition.

(3.) MR . S.K. Gupta, AAG appearing for the respondents has submitted that even though a recommendation can be made by the select committee under Section 10(1A) of the Act of 1986, yet the State Government is not bound to accept the recommendation and mechanically appoint those recommended as President/Member of the District Disputes Redressal Forums as the case may be. The State Government in its discretion, it was submitted, is free to take a decision to appoint or not appoint a person despite the recommendation of the select committee under Section 10(1A) of the Act of 1986 on the basis of the personal reputation of the person recommended, other relevant information available vis a vis him with the State Government, need for institutional improvement and considerations of the impact of appointment of the person recommended by the select committee to the post of President/Member of the District Disputes Redressal Forums. It was further submitted that since the taking of a decision not to appoint the petitioner as a Member (Female) in District Disputes Redressal Forums Sawaimadhopur on 02.05.2015, a fresh advertisement in relation thereto as also for appointment of other members in different forums in the State of Rajasthan has been issued on 26.05.2015. With the fresh selection process having been commenced, this Court should not interfere therewith and the petition hence be dismissed.