-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 561 OF 2006 Rajan Madhukar Badle ..Petitioner. Vs. The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissioner, Mah. State & Ors. ..Respondents. --- Mrs. A.S. Malwankar for the Petitioner. Mr. Milind More, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 and 8. Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar for the Consumer Courts Advocates’ Association -Intervenor. ----- CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. DATED : 08TH MARCH, 2006. DATED : 08TH MARCH, 2006. DATED : 08TH MARCH, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The order at Exh.‘A’ has debarred the petitioner from appearing, as the petitioner has no special authority to represent the appellant in Appeal No. 1337/2004. Considering Rule 16 of the Regulations of 2005, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that these rules have come into force in the year 2005 and the said case is previous to that and that under these circumstances, the petitioner should be allowed to appear in this matter. Once the Rules have come into -: 2 :- force and the rules requires under Rule 16, the authorisation of a special power of attorney from the Voluntary Consumer Organisation, the petitioner cannot contend that the said Rule is not applicable to him. If the petitioner desires to appear on behalf of the voluntary consumer organization, which is a recognized organization, he can do so only by way of special power of attorney. Considering that we do not find that the impugned order suffers from any error apparent and consequently, no interference is called for. 2. The petition is rejected. 08.03.2006 (F.I.Rebello,J) (Anoop V.Mohta, J) .....