STATE OF U P THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. versus ALL U. P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 492, Supreme Court of India, 2017
Outcome: Directions issued
Segment: Body
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 492 
A 
STATE OF U P THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
v. 
ALL U. P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
(Civil Appeal No. 2740 of2007) 
DECEMBER 15, 2017 
[DIPAK MISRA, CJI, A.M. KHANWILKAR AND 
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, .J.J.] 
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - ss. IO( l)(b), IO(J), 16(l)(b), 
16(2), 20(1 )(b), 248(1 )(iii), 248(2), JO and JOA - Consumer fora -
Paucity of infrastructure - Supreme Court had on 14-01-2016 
constituted a three member committee to examine the following 
aspects in the National Commission, State Commissions and the 
District Fora: ( 1) the infrastructure requirements; (2) the vacancy 
position of President/Members/ Presiding officers; (J) Need for 
additional benches, having regard to the workload and difficulties/ 
inconvenience which consumer dispute litigant has to face; (4) · 
conditions of eligibility, if prescribed, for appointment as non-
judicial members; (5) The nature and extent of Administrative· 
Powers, if any, conferred upon the Presidents of the State 
Commissions and the President of the District Fora; (6) The service 
conditions currently applicable including pay-scales admissible to 
President and Members, Judicial/Non-judicial; (7) The minimum staff 
required; (8) Desirability and feasibility of creating separate cadre 
for staff; (9) Any other aspect that the Committee may consider 
relevant to make the Consumer Disputes Fora/Commissions more 
effective, efficient ~md their process speedy -
Thereafter, Court 
issued directions on 2 l-ll-16 to the Union Gol'ernment to frame 
model rules (i) for ensuring uniformity in the exercise of the rule 
making power uls.lO(J) and s.16(2) of the Act, for adoption by the 
State governments; (ii) for prescribing objective norms for 
implementing the provisions of s.10(1 )(b), s.16(1 )(b) and s.20(1 )(b) 
in regard to appointment of the members; and (iii) for payment of 
salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of the members 
- It was further directed that upon approval of model rules by the 
Court, the State government shall proceed to adopt the model rules 
by framing appropriate rules u/s.30 of the Act - NCDRC requested 
to formulate regulations uls. JOA with the previous approval of the 
492
STATE OF U P THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. v. 
493 
ALL U.P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
Central Government in order to effectuate the power of A 
administrative control vested in the National Commission over the 
State Commissions u/s. 24(B)( /)(iii) and in respect of administrative 
control of the State Commissions over the District fora in terms of 
s.24(8)(2) to effecti11ely implement the objects and purposes of the 
Act - Directions now issued to the Union government to file a 
B 
comprehensive status report indicating the compliance with the 
directions issued on 21-11-16 by the Court - Meanwhile, three 
member Committee appointed by the Court filed its report, hence, 
completed its task - The Committee stands closed - ASG to assist 
the Court in formulating appropriate directions to ensure that proper 
infrastructure is made available at all levels of the consumer fora 
C 
across the country - Proceedings adjourned. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2740 
of2007. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.10.1998 of the High Court 
of Judicature at Allahabad in CMWP No. 968of1997 
D 
WITH 
Writ Petition (Civil) No.164 of2002. 
Ankur Prakash, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Ranjan Mukherjee, 
V. N. Raghupathy, Advs for the Appellants. 
Maninder Singh, ASG, Edward Belho, AAG, R. Balasubramanian, 
Shekhar Vyas, Santosh Kr. Vishwakarma, Prabhas Bajaj, Ms. Aarti 
Sharma, Ms. Niranjana Singh, Harish Kr. Ikhinchi, Ms. Gargi Khanna, 
S. Wasim A. Qadri, Raj Bhadur,
Mrs. D. Bharathi Reddy, Ms. C. K. 
Sucharita, S. Srinivasan, Mis. Corporate Law Group, Anil Shrivastav, 
Gopal Singh, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms. Puja Singh, 
Ms. Mamta Singh, Ms. Shodhika Sharma, T.N. Rama Rao, Hitesh Kumar 
Sharma, T. Veera Reddy, T. V. George, G. Prakash, V. N. Raghupathy, 
B. S. Banthia, Ranjan Mukherjee, R. Sathish, Ms. Sumita Hazarika, 
R. Gopalakrishnan, Radha Shyam Jena, Kuldip Singh, Sun ii Kumar Jain, 
Ms. Aruna Mathur, Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, 
Ms. Simran Jeet, Mis. Arputham Aruna And Co,. Tara Chandra Sharma, 
Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Ms. A. Subhashini, 
Kamini Jaiswal, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, V. G. Pragasam, S. Prabu 
Ramasubramanian, S. Manuraj, Mis. V. Maheshwari & Co., B. Balaji, 
E 
F 
G 
H
494 
A 
B 
c 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 
Tushar Bakshi, Ms. K. Enatoli Serna, Amit Kumar Singh, K. Luikang 
Michael, Ms. Hoineithiam, Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Ashok K. Srivastava, 
Ashok Mathur, Rajeev Sharma, K. R. Sasiprabhu, Mrs. Revathy 
Raghavan, Krishnanand Pandeya, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Ms. Kaveeta 
Wadia, T. Mahipal, Milind Kumar, T. V. Ratnam, B. Vinodh Kanna, A. 
Sriram, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Ankur Nagar, Nishe Rajen Shonker, 
Anu K. Joy, Reegan S. Bel, Bhupesh Narula, K.V. Jagdishvaran, Mrs. 
G. Indira, Shuvodeep Roy, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Shreyas Jain, 
Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha, Rajesh Srivastava, Advs for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
ORDER 
!. By an order dated 14 January 2016, this Court while dealing 
with the paucity of infrastructure in the consumer fora, constituted a 
three Member Committee consisting of: 
!. Dr Justice ArijitPasayat, 
D 
Former Judge, Supreme Court of India. 
E 
2. Ms Justice Rekha Sharma, 
Former Judge, High Court of Delhi. 
3. The Secretary to Government of India, 
Department of Consumer Affairs 
or his nominee. 
2. The Committee was requested to examine the following 
aspects : 
F 
(1) The infrastructural requirements of the respective State 
Commissions in terms of office space for the Presiding Officer, 
members and supporting staff and whether the same has been 
provided for. In case the requirement is not satisfied, what is the 
extent of deficiency and possible ways and means of
removing 
the same. 
G 
H 
(2) The vacancy position of President/Members/Presiding Officers 
in the National Commission, State Commissions and the District 
Fora and the steps that need to be taken for ensuring that vacancies 
are filled-up on a timely basis.
STATE OF U P THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. v. 
ALL U.P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
(3) Need for additional benches of the National Commission, State 
Commissions and the District Fora in the States or in any one of 
them having regard to 11 the workload and the difficulties/ 
inconvenience which a consumer dispute litigant has to face to 
access the National Commission, State Commissions and/or 
District Fora. 
(4) The conditions of eligibility, if any prescribed, for appointment 
495 
A 
B 
as non-judicial members of National Commission, State 
Commissions and the District Fora. In case no such conditions of 
eligibility are prescribed whether there is a need for doing so and 
what could be the conditions of eligibility for such appointments 
having regard to the nature of work and the relevant provisions of C 
the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 
(5) The nature and extent of Administrative Powers, if any, 
conferred upon the Presidents of the State Commissions and the 
President of the District Fora. In case no such powers have been 
conferred whether the same need to be conferred and if so to 
D 
what extent and ·effect. 
(6) The service conditions currently applicable including pay-scales 
admissible to President and Members, Judicial/Non-Judicial of the 
National Commission, State 12 Commissions and the District Fora 
and in case no service conditions are stipulated what could be 
E 
reasonable conditions of service applicable to such appointees. 
(7) The
minimum staff required for the National Commission and 
respeetive State Commissions/District Fora and in case no such 
standard is recognized or the staff provided is inadequate having 
regard to the nature and extent of work to be done by the 
F 
concerned Commissions and Fora what could be the norms for 
providing the same. 
(8) Desirability and feasibility of creating a separate cadre for 
staff in the National and State Commissions and the District Fora. 
(9) Any other aspect that the Committee may consider relevant 
and helpful with a view to making the Consumer Disputes Fora/ 
Commissions more effective, efficient and their process speedy. 
3. The Committee was requested to forward its deliberations to 
the state governments, on the completion of their deliberations qua each 
state to facilitate appropriate steps in a time bound manner. 
G 
H
-. .· 
496 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2017] 12 S.C.R. 
A 
4: Thereafter, by an order dated 21 Novembe~ 2016, this Court 
issued the following directions : 
(i) The Union Government shall for the purpose of ensuring 
uniformity in the exercise of the rule making power under 
Section 10(3) and Section 16(2) of the Consumer Protection 
B 
Act, 1986 frame model rules for adoption by the state 
governments. The model rules shall be framed within four 
months and shall be submitted to this Court for its approval; 
(ii) The Unio.n Government shall also frame within four months 
model rules prescribing objective norms for implementing 
C 
the provisions 24 of Section 10(1 )(b ), Section 16(1 )(b) and 
Section 20( 1 )(b) in regard to the appointment of members 
respectively of the District fora, State Commissions and 
National Commission; 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
(iii) The Union Government shall while framing the model rules 
·:have due regard to the formulation of objective norms for the 
assessment of the ability, knowledge and experience required 
to be possessed by the members of the respective fora in the 
domain areas referred to in the statutory provisions mentioned 
above. The model rules shall provide for the payment of 
salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of the 
members of the consumer fora commensurate with the 
nature of adjudicatory duties and the need to attract suitable 
talent to the adjudicating bodies. These rules shall be finalized 
upon due consultation
with the President of the National 
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, within the period 
stipulated above; 
(iv) Upon the approval of the model rules by this Court, the state 
governments shall proceed to adopt the model rules by 
framing appropriate rules in the exercise of the rule making 
powers under Section 30 of the Consumer Protection Act, 
19~; 
. 
(v) The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is 
requested to formulate regulations under Section 30A with 
the previous approval of the Central Government within a 
period of three months from today in order to effectuate the
STATE OF U P THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. v. 
ALL U.P. CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION 
power of administrative ·control vested in the National 
Commission over the State Commissions under Section 
24(B)(l )(iii) and in respect of the administrative control of the 
State Commissions over the District fora in terms of Section 
24(B)(2) as explained in this Judgment to 25 effectively 
implement the objects and purposes of the Consumer 
Protection Act, 1986. 
5. On 7 March 2017, the following directions were issued : 
497 
A 
B 
"During the course of hearing today, the proposed rules and 
regulations were brought to our notice. It also emerges during the 
course of hearing, that there is a need for certain modifications, in c 
the Rules and Regulations. Learned counsel for the rival parties 
accordingly sought a short adjournment, so as to enable them to 
iron out the issues, which require further debate and deliberation. 
3 One of the pressing issues, which needs to be dealt with forthwith, 
is the vacancy of the post of Registrar, of the National consumer 
Disputes Redressal Commission. It seems, that there is an 
D 
agreement on this issue as well, inasmuch as, learned Additional 
Solicitor General leaves the issue of recommendation to the 
Chairman of the above Commission, who will be at liberty to 
suggest the name of an appropriate individual, for the post of 
Registrar of the above Commission. As and an when such a 
E 
recommendation is made, the selected
individual will be appointed 
as Registrar, without delay, by way of deputation, till such time a 
regular incumbent is selected and appointed." 
6. In pursuance of the previous orders, Mr. Maninder Singh, 
learned Additional Solicitor General has filed a status report. We consider 
F 
it appropriate to direct that a comprehensive status report indicating 
compliance with the directions issued on 21 November 2016 by this 
Court shall be filed on affidavit within a period of six weeks from today 
by the Union government. 
7. The Committee appointed by this Court has filed its report on 4 
G 
March 2017. The Committee has completed its task. The work of the 
three memberCommittee appointed by this Court stands concluded with 
its report dated 4 March 2017, a copy of which has been placed on the 
record. The Committee stands closed. 
H

498 
A 
B 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 
8. We request Mr Maninder Singh, learned ASG to assist this 
Court in formulating appropriate directions to ensure that proper 
infrastructure is made ;1vailable at all levels of the consumer fora across 
the country.We direct that the proceedings shall now stand over to 
30 January 2018, to consider implementation of our decisions dated 
21 November 2016. 
Anliit Gyan 
Directions issued.