STATE OF U P AND ORSversusALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION

                         [2016] 8 S.C.R. 851



                     STATE OF U P AND ORS                                   A
                                  v.
   ALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION
                   (Civil Appeal No. 2740 of2007)
                       NOVEMBER21, 2016                                     B
    [T.S. THAKUR, CJI, DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD AND
               L. NAGESWARA RAO, JJ.]
        Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Effective implementation of
the Act - Deficiency of infrastructure in the adjudicatory fora - C
Constitution of Justice Arijit Pasayat Committee to look into
deficiencies - Interim report by the Committee to the effect that the
cons11111er fora did not function effectively due to a poor
organizational set up, grossly inadequate infrastructure, absence
of adequate and trained manpower and lack of qualified members
in the adjudicating bodies - Suggestions given to the Central D
Government and State Government - Failure of State Governments
to respond to the suggestions - Held: Systemic overhaul of the entire
infrastructure is necessary if the Act is not to beco111e a dead letter
- Findings of the Com111ittee in the interim report are entitled to
deference - Though powers relating to the appointments and E
ad111inistration of the State fora lie with the State Govern111ent, vesting
of the rule making power in the State Governments may result in a
 lack of uniformity of rules across the country, both in regard to the
ter111s and conditions of service and appointment - It would result
 in wide variation in standards and great deal of subjectivity, and
 bureaucratic and political interference - In view thereof. directions F
 issued to the Centre Govern111ent to fra111e model Rules relating to
 administration, selection and appointment of me111bers, infrastructure
 etc., at al/ levels of consumer fora - ss. 24B,6(1)(b),JO(l)(b), 30.
       This Court issued several directions as regards the deficiency of
infrastructure in the adjudicatory fora under the Consumer Protection       G
Act, 1986. A Committee presided by Justice Arijit Pasayat was
constituted to look into deficiencies in the working of the fora. The
Committee assessed the prevailing conditions in different States.
Thereafter, the Committee submitted an Interim Report to the effect
that the consumer fora did not function as effectively as expected due to
                                                                            H
                                  851
852            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A     a poor organizational set up, grossly inadequate infrastructure, absence
      of adequate and trained manpower and lack of qualified members in the
      adjudicating bodies. The suggestions were given to the Central
      Government and the State Governments. The State Governments failed
      to respond to the suggestions for streamlining the state of affairs.
B           Adjourning the matters for further directions and for
      reporting compliance, the Court
             HELD: 1.1 The interim report of the Committee provides
      an unfortunate reflection of the state of affairs in the consumer
      fora at the district, state and national level. That these bodies
c     which are vested with important functions of a judicial nature
      continue to work despite the prevalence of such adverse
      conditions and in the face of the apathy of the governments both
      at the national and state level is a matter which requires immediate
      intervention by this Court. A systemic overhaul of the entire
      infrastructure is necessary if the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
D     is not to become a dead letter. With the proliferation of goods
      and services in a rapidly growing economy, Parliament envisaged
      the enactment to be the corner-stone of a vibrant consumer
      movement. Reality has been distant from the aspirations of the
      law. The state of affairs revealed before the Court warrants
E     systemic changes. [Para 9](861-G-H; 862-A]
         1.2 One of the principal problems governing the functioning
  of the district fora and the State Commissions is the absence of
  clarity in regard to the exercise of administrative and disciplinary
  control. Section 24 vests administrative control over the State
F Commissions in the President of the National Commission and
  over the district fora in the Presidents of the State Commissions.
  The extent of the administrative control shall be in all matters
  ,.-fating to the administrative functioning of the forum concerned
  including but not limited to assignment of judicial and
  administrative work; posting, transfer and control over members;
G selection, appointment and disciplinary matters relating to the
  staff of the district fora and State Commissions and in relation
  provisioning and meeting the infrastructural requirements of
  those bodies. The requirements of infrastructure would be met
  in co-ordi'natign with the Departments of Consumer Affairs of
H the  States concerned and, in relation to the National Commission
     STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. v. ALL U P CONSUMER                     853
           PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION

in coordination with the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food    A
and Public Distribution. [Para 12)[862-C-D; 867-A-C]
      1.3 The rule making powers under the 1986 Act are
embodied in Section 30. The Central government is vested with
rule making power in relation to Section 20(l)(b)-relating to
appointments of members of the National Commission under B
Section 30. The rule making power with reference to the
provisions of Section lO(l)(b) and Section 16(1)(b) is vested in
the State government under Section 30. The difficulty arises
because the vesting of the rule making power in the state
governments in this manner may result in a lack ofuniformity of C
rules across the country, both in regard to the terms and
conditions of service as well as in regard to the modalities to be
followed in ensuring that persons appointed as members fulfill
the qualifications which are prescribed. These are broad general
categories. There can be no gainsaying the importance of adopting
unified standards and objective processes of selection from a D
national perspective. This would ensure an objective formulation
of norms and their uniform application in different States in the
country. In the absence of a uniform pattern, the result is a wide
variation in standards and a great deal of subjectivity, and
bureaucratic and political interference, noticed in the reports
submitted by the Committee. The findings of the Committee in E
the interim report are entitled to deference. [Para 11)(866-D-H)
      1.4 Under Section 30(A)(l) the National Commission is
empowered, with the previous approval of the Central
Government, to frame regulations not inconsistent with the Act
to provide for all matters for which provision is necessary or F
expedient for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions. It is
necessary for the National Commission to frame regulations
expeditiously to give effect to its administrative control u/s. 24B.
The Regulations shall ensure the effective exercise of
administrative control by the National Commission over the State G
Commissions and by the latter over the district fora. [Para 14)867-
F-G)
     1.5 In the Consumer Protection Bill, 2015, the proposed
expansion of pecuniary limits of the district fora to Rupees one ·
                                                                     H
854           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2016] 8 S.C.R.



A     crore, requires the strengthening of the quality of adjudication in
      the district fora. Members of the forum must be aware of the
      responsibility vested in them as adjudicating officers. There is a
      need to ensure checks and balances. The work which is performed
      by the consumer fora constituted in the three tier hierarchy
      provided under law is of a judicial nature. The district forum is
B
      vested with powers of a Civil Court under the Code of Civil
      Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit in respect of various matters
      set out in Section 13(4). These provisions apply to the State
      Commission u/s. 18 and to the National Commission u/s.22. Both
      having regard to the significant adjudicatory powers that are
c     conferred upon the fora constituted under the Act and particularly
      in the context of the observations contained in the interim report
      of the Committee, the said directions are necessary to inculcate
      a sense of discipline and accountability amongst the members of
      the fora constituted under the Act. [Para 15][868-C-F]
D           1.6 The reliefs mentioned by the Committee regarding
      seeking direction to the State of Tamil Nadn and the State of
      Jammu and Kashmir respectively to appoint the President and
      Members of the State Commission at the earliest, is allowed. As
      regards prayer seeking direction to State of Uttar Pradesh to
      take appropriate disciplinary action against 'JA' non-judicial
 E
      member of District Forum for his unauthorized absence for over
      a year, forthwith, the President of the State Commission in Uttar
      Pradesh is directed upon the issuance of show cause notice to
      'JA' and after furnishing him an opportunity of submitting his
      explanation submit a report to the State Government. The State
 F    Government would thereupon pass necessary orders in
      accordance with law within the stipulated time. [Para 16][868-G-
      lf: 869-A, C-DJ

         1.7 This Court permitted the Committee to forward its
   recommendations to each State Government concerned for
 G appropriate steps in a time bound manner. A copy of the
   recommendations was directed to be submitted to this Court to
   enable it to issue directions should the recommendations not be
   implemented by the State Governments. Since the
   recommendations have been made after a detailed inspection and
 H in the interests of facilitating a proper implementation of the
      STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. v. ALL UP CONSUMER                        855
            PROTECTION BAR ASSOCIATION

provisions of the Act, the State Governments is directed to            A
implement the recommendations of the Committee within a period
of three months. [Para l 7](869-F-G]
      1.8 In view of the above, the following directions are issued:
(i) The Union Government would for the purpose of ensuring
uniformity in the exercise of the rule making power under Section      B
10(3) and Section 16(2) frame model rules for adoption by the
State Governments, within four months and would submit to this
Court for its approval; (ii) The Union Government would also
frame within four months model rules prescribing objective norms
for implementing the provisions of Section lO(l)(b), Section           C
16(1)(b) and Section 20(l)(b) in regard to the appointment of
members respectively of the District fora, State Commissions
and National Commission; (iii) The Union Government would
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          D
respective fora in the domain areas referred to in the statutory
provisions. The model rules would 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
                                                                        E
adjudicating bodies. These rules would be finalized upon due
consultation with the President of the National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, within the period stipulated;
Upon the approval of the model Rules by this Court, the State
Governments would proceed to adopt the model rules by framing
appropriate rules in the exercise of the rule making powers under       F
Section 30 of the Act. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission is requested to formulate regulations under Section
30A with the previous approval of the Central Government within
the stipulated period in order to effectuate the power of
administrative control vested in the National Commission over
                                                                        G
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) to effectively implement
 the objects and purposes of the Act. [Para 18] [869-H; 870-A-
H]
                                                                        H
856            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A          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 968 of 1997.
                                         WITH
B
            W. P. (C) No. 164 of2002.
             Maninder Singh, ASG, Ajit Kumar Sinha, Atul Chitley, Sr. Advs.,
      V. K. Shukla, S. K. Pabbi, AA Gs, Suryanarayana Singh, Sr. AAG, Gaurav
      Dhingra, R. Balasubramanian, Shekhar Vyas, Santosh Kumar, Ms. Aarti
c     Sharma, Prabhas Bajaj, R. K. Rathor, R. S. Nagar, Ms. Rukhmini Bobde,
      S. Wasim A. Qadri, S. S. Rawat, D. S. Mahra, M. K. Maroria,
      K. V. Jagdishvaran, Ms. G. Indira, Shuvodeep Roy, Gopal Singh,
      Ms. Varsha Poddar, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha, Rajesh Srivastava,
      Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Krishnanand Pandey, Ms. Hemantika Wahi,
      Ms. Aagam Kaur, Ms. Mamta Singh, V. N. Raghupathy,
D     Parikshit P. Angadi, Nishe Rajen Shonker, Ms. Anu K. Joy, Gajendra
      Khichi, Amo! Nirmal Kumar Suryawanshi, Nishant R. Kathneshwarkar,
      Ranjan Mukherjee, K. V. Kharlyngdoh, K. N. Madhusoodhanan,
      R. Sathish, Ms. K. Enatoli Serna, Edward Belho, Amit Kumar Singh,
      K. Luikang Michael, Ms. Disha Singh, Shivendu Gaur, V. G. Pragasam,
E     S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Ms. Aruna Mathur, Yusuf Khan, Avneesh
      Arputham, Ms.AnuradhaArputham, Gopal Singh, Rituraj Biswas, Vikrant
      Yadav, Mukul Singh, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Ms. Rachna Srivastava,
      Ms. Monika, Sukrit R. Kapoor, Ajay Pal, Arun K. Sinha, Avijit
      Bhattacharjee, Balaji Srinivasan, Gunnam Venkateswara Rao, Kuldip
      Singh, Naresh K. Sharma, Pradeep Misra, Rajesh Srivastava, Ravindra
F     Kumar, R. Gopalakrishnan, S. Srinivasan, T. Harish Kumar, Tushar
      Bakshi, Ms. C. K. Sucharita, Mis. Corporate Law Group, T. V. Ratnam,
      Ashok K. Srivastava, C. D. Singh, Krishnanand Pandeya,
      K. R. Sasiprabhu, Milind Kumar, Pramod Dayal, Radha Shyam Jena,
      Rajeev Sharma, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Ms. Revathy Raghavan, Tara
G     Chandra Sharma, Ms. A. Subhashini, Ms. Kaveeta Wadia, Ms. Sumita
      Hazarika, Advs. for the appearing parties.
            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
             DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. I. The deficiency of
      infrastructure in the adjudicatory fora constituted under the Consumer
H     Protection Act, 1986 has led to several directions of this Court in the
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                                    857
      ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

course of the proceedings in this case. On 14 January 2016, this Court               A
constituted a Committee presided over by Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat, a
former judge of this Court, to examine:
       (i) the infrastructural requirements of the State Commissions,
deficiencies in infrastructure and remedial measures;
       (ii) the position of vacancies of members at the national, state and          B
district level;
         (iii) the need for additional Benches at the national, state and district
level;
         (iv)conditions of eligibility for appointment of non-judicial members;       C
      (v) administrative powers which have been or should be conferred
on the presiding officers of the state and district fora;
       (vi) service conditions including pay scales governing the presiding
officers and members;
                                                                                      D
         (vii)requirements of staff;
      (viii) creation of a separate cadre of staff at the national, state
and district level; and
         (ix) other relevant issues.
      The Committee was requested, while examining these issues, to                   E
submit its recommendations. The Committee has since the
commencement of its work in February 2016 inquired extensively into
the matters referred to it and has made an assessment of the prevailing
conditions in the States ofOrissa, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, Andhra
Pradesh, Telangana, Jammu and Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Bihar and                          F
Jharkhand. The Committee has also analysed the prevailing position at
the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, as well as the
State Commission in New Delhi.
       2. The facts which have emerged from the interim report submitted
by the Committee on 17 October 2016 constitute a sobering reflection of G
how far removed reality lies from the goals and objectives which
Parliament had in view while enacting the Consumer Protection Act,
1986. The Committee has observed that the fora constituted under the
enactment do not function as effectively as expected due to a poor
organizational set up, grossly inadequate infrastructure, absence of
                                                                         H
858            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A     adequate and trained manpower and lack of qualified members in the
      adjudicating bodies. Benches of the state and district fora sit, in many
      cases for barely two or three hours every day and remain non-functional
      for months due to a lack of coram. Orders are not enforced like other
      orders passed by the civil courts. The state governments have failed to
      respond to the suggestions of the Committee for streamlining the state
B
      of affairs.
            3. The pathetic state of infrastructure is made evident in the
      following findings in the report of the Committee:
          "The Committee, during its visits to states, has found that there
c are no proper court-rooms with lights and fans, chairs and tables. The
  condition of Chambers of the Presiding Members is pathetic. They do
  not have adequate or trained staff. They do not have stenographers for
  taking dictations. At some Consumer Fora, there are no peons to retrieve
  the files from the Record Room. The Record-Rooms are, also, either
  too small and have no almirah, shelves or compactors to keep the files.
D The files are kept in open and get misplaced or eaten by termites. The
  Central Government provides funds for construction of the new buildings,
  carrying out additions/alterations/renovations of existing buildings and
  grant for acquiring non-building assets such as furnitures, office
  equipments etc. The State Governments have to provide the land for
E construction of new buildings for the Consumer Fora. The Committee
  has noted that the State Governments have not been quick enough to
  allot land for construction of Consumer Fora in their respective States.
  It has, also, come to the notice of the Committee that the State
  Governments - responsible for timely filling up of the vacancies of the
  Presidents and Members in the State Commissions and District Fora of
F the states, have failed to keep the time limit. The Committee has come
  across instances where the State Governments have taken upto 7/10
  months to approve the recommendations of the Selection Committee".
          The quality of presiding members, especially of non-judicial
  members at the state and district levels is poor. One of the reasons is
G that the remuneration which is being paid to non-judicial members of
  consumer fora varies from state to state and is too meager to attract
  qualified talent. Most of the non-judicial members are not even capable
  of writing or dictating small orders. At certain places non-judicial members
  act in unison against the presiding officer, while passing orders contrary
H to law, damaging the reputation of the adjudicating body. Presidents, as
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                           859
     ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

a result, prefer a situation where such non-judicial members absent A
themselves from work if only so that judicial work can be carried out by
the presidingjudge impartially and objectively. Many non-judicial members
do not maintain punctuality and others attend to work sporadically once
or twice a week. The Committee has observed that that the problem
lies in -(i) absence of proper remuneration; (ii) appointment of former
                                                                              8
judicial officers who lack motivation and zeal; (iii) appointment of
practicing lawyers as presiding officers of district fora; and (iv) political
and bureaucratic interference in appointments. Many of the non-judicial
members attend to the place of work only to sign orders which have
been drafted by the presiding officer.
       4. The Committee has furnished concrete examples of how               C
bureaucratic and political influence has marred the selection process as
a result of which the functioning of consumer fora is detrimentally
affected. Three instances furnished in the Report of the Committee
provided a telling example of the state of affairs:
       "15). The Committee could make out that there has been                D
considerable bureaucratic and political influence/interference in the
'selection process' and functioning of the Consumer Fora. Just to cite a
few instances, the Committee found that relatives of politicians,
bureaucrats and judicial fraternity have been selected. A non-Judicial
Member Mr. Jamal Akhtar posted at District Forum Meerut has been             E
absenting without permission since 11.05.2015. The State Government
has failed to take any action against him. Even the plea of President,
State Commission has gone unheeded. The result is that his post has not
been declared vacant and another non-Judicial Member posted elsewhere
has been attached in his place.
                                                                             F
       16). One non-Judicial Member who had her first term at Lucknow
and has now been enjoying her Second Term, having been appointed for
District Forum Barabanki but has been attached to Greater Noida and
as per the reports, comes to Forum once or twice a week. Another
woman non-Judicial Member who happens to be wife of a bureaucrat
was appointed for District Forum Baghpat but was attached/posted at          G
Greater Noida. These few instances make it crystal clear that there is
definite political influence and interference and in such a scenario, the
work of District Consumer Fora is affected as it results in lowering the
morale of the President.
                                                                             H
860            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2016) 8 S.C.R.


A            17). In Haryana, a non-Judicial Woman Member did/does not
      attend the District Forum regularly, as she has to travel around 150/160.
      KM everyday. The President of one District Forum who happens to be
      former President of Bar Association has been serving the second term
      as President. Such non-Judicial Members manage to get selected and
      then misuse their position as Members, as they call themselves 'Judges'."
B
             The selection of persons as presiding officers and as members of
      the fora lacks transparency without a fixed criteria for selection. The
      Committee has, in our view with justification, proposed that a written
      test should be conducted to assess the knowledge of persons who apply
      for posts in the district fora. Issues of conflict of interest also arise
c     when persons appointed from a local area are appointed to a district
      forum in the same area.
             5. The position of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal
      Commission has emerged from the interactions of the Committee with
      the President and members of the Commission. The serious deficiencies
D     of infrastructure are summarized below :
            (i)Sanctioned strength of personnel is far lower than the actual
      requirement and is not based on the pendency of cases or on objective
      norms adopted by statutory organizations;
E          (ii)There are 118 sanctioned posts as against a requirement of
      322 while pendency of cases as on 30 September 2016 is 11,379;
            (iii)Few personnel work on a regular basis while others who are
      inducted on contract cannot be entrusted with work of a regular nature;
            (iv)The sanctioned strength ofsixAssistants, ten UDCs and eight
 F    LDCs to attend on the administrative side to judicial filing, establishment
      work and to the general administration is totally inadequate;
            (v)The strength of members has increased from five in 2003 to
      t~ve at present without a corresponding increase in supporting staff
      though the average monthly institution of original complaints has increased
G     by 300 per cent; and
            (vi)Though the proposal for the creation of posts was sent to the
      Government of India in 2010, only a few posts for catering to the
      requirement of a sixth Bench (presently there are five) have been
      sanctioned. The Committee has recommended that at least 51 posts be
H
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                         861
      ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

created immediately as an interim measure.                                A
       The Committee has noted that while the salary and allowances of
the President of the National Commission are equivalent to those of a
Judge of the Supreme Court, the conditions of service of members of
the National Commission are not at par with those of the sitting judges
of the High Court. The National Commission hears appeals and revisions B
against orders of the State Commissions, whose Presidents are treated
at par with judges of the High Court. An anomalous situation prevails
where members of a higher forum (the National Commission) have
conditions of service inferior to those applicable to members of a forum
lower in hierarchy. The Committee has proposed that the members of
the National Commission should get the same salaries, allowances and C
conditions of services as are available to sittingjudges of the High Court.
        6. The Committee has opined that it is necessary to confer upon
the President ofthe National Commission the power to recruit and transfer
staff, to obviate delay in appointments. Exemption from consultation
with the UPSC should, it is proposed, be granted as in the case of several D
other statutory tribunals, such as CAT, AFT and NGT.
       7. The posts of President and members of the State Commission
in Tamil Nadu and Jammu & Kashmir are lying vacant for more than
one year. The Committee was assured by the Principal Secretary,
Consumer Affairs, Tamil Nadu on 31 May 2016 that these appointments       E
would be cleared within a short period. However, until the date of the
report, no steps have been taken. The Government of Jammu & Kashmir
has failed to appoint the President of the State Commission.
       8. The Committee has formulated its suggestions to the Central
Government in Annexure A and the directions which it has issued to the     F
state governments in Annexures B to M to the report.
       9. The interim report of the Committee provides an unfortunate
reflection of the state ofaffairs in the consumer fora at the district, state
and national level. That these bodies which are vested with important
functions ofajudicial nature continue to work despite the prevalence of G
such adverse conditions and in the face of the apathy of the governments
both at the national and state level ls a matter which requires immediate
intervention by this Court. A systemic overhaul of the entire infrastructure
is necessary if the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not to beCOJllC<,.ii
dead letter. With the proliferation of goods and services in a rapidly H
862            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           (2016) 8 S.C.R.


A     growing economy, Parliament envisaged the enactment to be the corner-
      stone of a vibrant consumer movement. Reality has been distant from
      the aspirations of the law. Since the state of affairs which has been
      revealed before the Court warrants systemic changes, we propose to
      initially issue directions on certain specific issues in the present order
      within a judicially manageable framework. We will now take up each of
8
      the issues seriatim so as to enable the court to focus on each problem
      and on the nature of the malady before proceeding to formulate the
      directions :
            (I) Administrative control :
c             One of the principal problems governing the functioning of the
      district fora on the one hand and the State Commissions on the other
      hand is the absence of clarity in regard to the exercise of administrative
      and disciplinary control. Section 248 provides for administrative control,
      in the following terms :
D            "24B. Administrative control. - (I) The National Commission
      shall have administrative control over all the State Commissions in the
      following m11tters, namely:-
           (i) calling for periodical return regarding the institution, disposal,
      pendency of cases;
 E           (ii) issuance ofinstructions regarding adoption ofuniform procedure
      in the hearing of matters, prior service of copies of documents produced
      by one party to the opposite parties, furnishing of English translation of
      judgments written in any language, speedy grant of copies of documents;
            (iii) generally overseeing the functioning of the State
 F    Commissions or the District Fora to ensure that the objects and
      purposes of the Act are best served without in any way interfering
      with their quasi-.iudicial freedom.
             (2) The State Commission shall have administrative
             control over all the District Fora within its jurisdiction
 G           in all matters referred to in sub-section (l)".
             (emphasis supplied)
            Clause (iii) of sub-section (I) of Section 248 confers upon the
      National Commission the power of administrative control over all the
      State Commissions to generally oversee the functioning of the State
 H
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                                  863
      ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

Commissions or the district fora to ensure that the objects and purposes          A
of the Act are best served. However, this is to be achieved without
interfering with the quasi-judicial freedom of the State Commissions and
the district fora. Under sub-section (2) the State Commission is conferred
with administrative control over all the district fora within its jurisdiction
in all matters referred to in sub-section (1 ), which will necessarily cover
                                                                                  8
clause (iii). The power of administrative control which has been conferred
upon the National Commission in relation to the State Commissions and
upon the Sta:te Commissions in relation to the district fora is an entrustrnent
with a purpose; the object being to oversee the functioning of the forum,
which is subject to its administrative control so as to ensure that it is an
effective instrument of rendering justice to consumers. The power of               C
administrative control is couched in wide terms. The power would include
overseeing the functioning of the State Commissions and the district
fora in all administrative matters. This would include the posting of and
control over members, appointment of and control over manpower,
provision of adequate infrastructure and the streamlining of all
                                                                                   D
administrative matters (except the exercise of the judicial power in
deciding complaints, appeals and revisions). The difficulties which have
been encountered in the proper functioning of the district fora and the
State Commissions can be obviated in a large measure once the true
ambit of Section 248 is construed, by vesting full powers of an
administrative nature in the National Commission (in relation to the State         E
Commissions) and in the State Commissions (in relation to district fora).
In the National Commission, the exercise ofadministrative authority over
the State Commissions shall be vested in the President. Similarly, in the
State Commissions the exercise ofadministrative control over the district
fora shall be vested in the President.
                                                                                   F
       (2) Rule making powers:
      Rule making powers under the Consumer Protection Act, I 986
are embodied in Section 30 which provides as follows:
       "30. Power to make rules.-
                                                                                   G
       (1) The Central
       Government may, by notification, make rules for
       carrying out the provisions contained in clause (a) of
       sub-section (1) of section 2, clause (b) of sub-section
       (2) of section 4, sub-section (2) of section 5, sub-
                                                                                   H
864            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A           section (2) of section 12, clause (vi) of sub-section
            (4) of section 13, clause (hb) of sub-section (1) of
            section 14, section 19, clause (b) of sub-section (1)
            and sub-section (2) of section 20, section 22 and
            section 23 of this Act.
B           (2) The State Government may, by notification, make
            rules for carrying out the provisions contained in
            clause (b) of sub-section (2) and sub-section (4) of
            section 7, clause (b) of sub-section (2) and sub-section
            (4) of Section SA, clause (b) of sub-section (1) and
            sub-section(3) of section 10, clause (c) of sub-section
c           (1) of section 13, clause (hb) of sub-section (1) and
            sub-section (3) of section 14, section 15 and clause
            (b) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of section
            16 of this Act."
        The composition of the district fora is provided in Section I 0 while
D the composition of the State Commissions is provided in Section 16.
  Section 10(3) provides as follows:
            "IO.


            (3) The salary or honorarium and other allowances payable
E
            to, and the other terms and conditions of service of the
            members of the District Forum shall be such as may be
            prescribed by the State Government:
            [Provided tha.t the appointment of a member on whole-time
            basis shall be made by the State Government on the
F           recommendation of the President of the State Commission
            taking into consideration such factors as may be prescribed
            including the work load of the District Forum.]
               The pension received by the presidents of the District
            Consumer Forum in respect of their previous services as
G           District Judges is subject to deduction from their salary as
            president of the Forum fixed under provisions of the Act."
            In relation to the State Commissions sub-section (2) of Section 16
      provides as follows:

H
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                           865
     ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

      "16.                                                                  A

       (2) The salary or honorarium and other allowances payable
       to, and the other terms and
       conditions of service of, the members of the State
       Commission shall be such as may be prescribed by the State
                                                                              B
       Government.
       [Provided that the appointment of a member on whole-time
       basis shall be made by the State Government on the
       recommendation of the President of the State Commission
       taking into consideration such factors as may be prescribed
       including the work load of the State Commission.]"                     c
       Hence, the state governments are required under sub-section (3) of
Section 10 and under sub-section (2) of Section 16 to prescribe the salary
or, honorarium, allowances and the other terms and conditions of service
of the members of the district fora and of the State Commission.
        10. Section 10 provides for composition of the district forum. Clause
(b) of sub-section ( 1) of Section I 0 stipulates the appointment of two D
members (apart from the President, who is to be or should have been or
must be qualified to be a district judge). Section 10( I )(b) is as follows:
       "Composition of the District Forum :
       ( 1) Each District Forum shall consist of •.•
       (b). two other members, one of whom shall be a woman,                  E
       who shall have the following qualifications, namely:-
       (i) be not less than thirty-five years of age,
       (ii) possess a bachelor's degree from a recognized university,
       (iii) be persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have
        adequate knowledge and experience of at least ten years in
        dealing with problems relating to economics, law, commerce,           F
        accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration."
        Section 16( 1)(b) provides for appointment of the members of the
State Commission (apart from the president who is to be or should have
been a judge of the High Court). Section 16(l)(b) in so far as is material
provides as follows:
                                                                              G
        "16. Composition of the State Commission:
       ( 1) Each State Commission shall consist of -


       16(1 )(b) Each State Commission shall consist of not less
                                                                             H
866           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A          than two, and not more than such number of members, as
           may be prescribed, and one of whom shall be a woman,
           who shall have the following qualifications, namely:-
           (i) be not less than thirty-five years of age;
           (ii) possess a bachelor's degree from a recognised
B          university; and
           (iii) be persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have
           adequate knowledge and experience of at least ten years
           in dealing with problems relating to economics, law,
           commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or
           administration."
c
         11. The Central government is vested with rule making power in
  relation to Section 20( I )(b) - relating to appointments of members of
  the National Commission under Section 30. The rule making power with
  reference to the provisions of Section IO(l)(b) and Section 16(1)(b) is
  vested in the State government under Section 30. The difficulty arises
D because the vesting of the rule making power in the state governments
  in this manner may result in a lack of uniformity of rules across the
  country, both in regard to the terms and conditions of service as well as
  in regard to the modalities to be followed in ensuring that persons
  appointed as members fulfill the qualifications which are prescribed.
E Both in relation to the State Commissions and the district fora, a member
  must be a person of ability and standing with adequate knowledge and
  experience of at least ten years in dealing with problems relating to
  economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or
  administration. These are broad general categories. There can be no
  gainsaying the impo11ance of adopting unified standards and objective
F processes of selection from a national perspective. This would ensure
  an objective fonnulation of nonns and their uniform application in different
  states in the country. In the absence of a uniform pattern, the resu It is a
  wide variation in standards and a great deal of subjectivity, and
  bureaucratic and political interference, which has been noticed in the
G reports submitted by the Committee to this Court. The Committee which
  has looked at the entire matter in perspective consists of a former judge
  of this Court, a former judge of the Delhi High Court, and the Secretary
  to the Union Government in the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
  Public Distribution. The findings of the Committee in the interim report
  are entitled to deference.
H
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                               867
      ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

       12. In these circumstances, we hold that Section 24B vests A
administrative control over the State Commissions in the President of
the National Commission and over the district fora in the Presidents of
the State Commissions. The extent of the administrative control shall be
in all matters relating to the administrative functioning of the forum
concerned including but not limited to assignment of judicial and B
administrative work; posting, transfer and control over members;
selection, appointment and disciplinary matters relating to the staff of
the district fora and State Commissions and in relation provisioning and
meeting the infrastructural requirements of those bodies. The
requirements of infrastructure shall be met in coordination with the
Departments of Consumer Affairs of the states concerned and, in relation C
to the National Commission in coordination with the Union Ministry of
Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution.          ·
       13. We also direct the Union Government to frame model rules
with reference to the provisions of Section 10( 1)(b) and Section 10(2)
and Section 16(l)(b) and Section 16(2), within four months from today.         D
The model rules so framed shall be placed before this Court for its
approval. After the model rules are approved by this Court, the state
governments shall while exercising their rule making authority with
reference to the provisions of Section I 0(1 )(b) and Section 16(1 )(b) and
with reference to the provisions of Sections 10(3) and 16(2) frame rules
in conformity with the model rules. Existing rules, if any, shall have to be    E
brought in conformity with the model rules.
        14. Under Section 30(A)(l) the National Commission is
empowered, with the previous approval of the Central Government, to
frame regulations not inconsistent with the Act to provide for all matters
for which provision is necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving         F
effect to the provisions of the Act. It is necessary for the National
Commission to frame regulations expeditiously to give effect to its
administrative control under Section 24B. The Regulations shall inter
alia extend to ensuring the effective exercise of administrative control
by the National Commission over the State Commissions and by the                G
latter over the district fora.
      15. Under Section 24B the adjudicatory fora under the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 have been constituted to resolve complaints of
consumers about: (i) unfair or restrictive trade practices by traders and
service providers; (ii) defects in goods purchased or agreed to be              H
       868             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2016] 8 S.C.R.


       A     purchased; and (iii) deficiencies in the provision of services availed ofor
             hired.
                    Against the decision of the district forum upon an origiml complaint
             a remedy of an appeal is provided to the State Commission. The State ·
             Commission also has jurisdiction where the amount claimed is in excess
       B     of Rupee~ twenty lakhs (complaints below that amount lie before the
             district fora) and upto Rupees one crore. Appeals from orders of the
             State Commission lie to the National Commission. Apart from its
             appellate jurisdiction the National Commission has the power to entertain
             complaints where the value of goods or services and compensation sought
             exceeds Rupees one crore. The Committee has noted that in the
       c     Consumer Protection Bill, 2015 the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district
             fora is to be enhanced to Rupees one crore. The proposed expansion of
             pecuniary limits requires the strengthening of the quality ofadjudication
             in the district fora. Members of the forum must be aware of the
             responsibility vested in them as adjudicating officers. There is a need to
';1•   D     ensure checks and balances. The work which is performed by the
'            consumer fora constituted in the three tier hierarchy pro"'.ided under law
1            is ofajudicial nature. The district forum is vested with powers ofa Civil
!            Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit in
 ,,'         respect of various matters set out in Section 13(4). These provisions
             apply to the State Commission under Section 18 and to the National
       E     Commission under Section 22. Both having regard to the significant
             adjudicatory powers that are conferred upon the fora constituted under
             the Act and particularly in the context of the observations contained in
             the interim report of the Committee, we have come to the conclusion
             that the above directions are necessary to inculcate a sense of discipline
       F     and accountability amongst the members of the fora constituted under
             the Act.
                    16. The Committee has sought the directions of this Court
             spl·: i fically in the following terms:
                    "a) The state of Tamil Nadu be directed to appoint the
       G            President and Members of the' State Commission at the
                    earliest;
                    b) The State of Jammu & ~ashmir be directed to appoint .
                    the President and Member of the State Commission at the
                    earliest; and
       H
868             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A     purchased; and (iii) deficiencies in the provision of services availed ofor
      hired.
         Against the decision of the district forum upon an origiml complaint
  a remedy of an appeal is provided to the State Commission. The State
  Commission also has jurisdiction where the amount claimed is in excess
B of Rupees twenty lakhs (complaints below that amount lie before the
  district fora) and upto Rupees one crore. Appeals from ortlers of the
  State Commission lie to the National Commission. Apart from its
  appellate jurisdiction the National Commission has the power to entertain
  complaints where the value ofgoods or services and compensation sought

c exceeds    Rupees one crore. The Committee has noted that 'in the
  Consumer Protection Bill, 2015 the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district
  fora is to be enhanced to Rupees one crore. The proposed expansion of
  pecuniary limits requires the strengthening of the quality ofadjudication
  in the district fora. Members of the forum must be aware of the
  responsibility vested in them as adjudicating officers. There is a need to
D ensure checks and balances. The work which is performed by the
  consumer fora constituted in the three tier hierarchy provided under law
  is ofa judicial nature. The district forum is vested with powers ofa Civil
  Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit in
  respect of various matters set out in Section 13(4). These provisions
  apply to the State Commission under Section 18 and to the National
E Commission under Section 22. Both having regard to the significant
  adjudicatory powers that are conferred upon the fora constituted under
  the Act and particularly in the context of the observations contained in
  the interim report of the Committee, we have come to the conclusion
  that the above directions are necessary to inculcate a sense of discipline
F and accountability amongst the members of the fora constituted under
  the Act.                 ·
             16. The Committee has sought the directions of this Court
      src ... '.ically in the following terms:
             ··a) The state of Tamil Nadu be directed to appoint the
 G           President and Members of the State Commission at the
             earliest;
             b) The State of Jammu & Kashmir be directed to appoint
             the President and Member of the State Commission at the
             earliest; and
 H
 STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                        869
      ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

      c) The State of Uttar Pradesh be directed to take                  A
      appropriate disciplinary action against Mr. Jamal Akhtar,
      non-judicial member of District Forum for his unauthorized
      absence for over a year, forthwith."
       We find justification in this request of the Committee. The reliefs
mentioned in (a) and (b) above are allowed. A copy of this order shall 8
be served on the Chief Secretaries respectively of the States of Tamil
Nadu and Jammu & Kashmir for compliance within a period of two
months from the receipt of a copy. As regards prayer (c), the President
of the State Commission in Uttar Pradesh shall cause a notice to be
served upon Shri Jamal Akhtar posted at the district forum, Meerut, who
has been absenting himself without permission allegedly since 11 May C
2015. The Committee has noted that the state government has failed to
take action against him and even the plea of the President of the State
Commission has gone unheeded. We order and direct that the President
of the State Commission shall upon the issuance of a notice to show
cause to Shri Jamal Akhtar and after furnishing him an opportunity of D
submitting his explanation submit a report to the state government,
preferably within one month from the receipt of a copy of this order.
The state government shall thereupon pass necessary orders in
accordance with law no later than within a fortnight of the receipt of the
report of the President of the State Commission.
                                                                           E
       17. The Committee has annexed to its rep011 at Annexures 8 to
M copies of the letters issued by it to the Chief Secret11ries to the
governments ofOrissa, NCT ofDelhi, Haryana, Punjab, Union Territory
of Chandigarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra
Pradesh and Telegana on 14 October 2016 for rectification of
deficiencies in infrastructure and resolution of various aspects. By the F
order of this Court dated 14 January 2016 the Committee was permitted
to forward its recommendations to each state government concerned
for appropriate steps in a time bound manner. A copy of the
 recommendations was directed to be submitted to this Court to enable it
to issue directions should the recommendations not be implemented by G
the state governments. Since the recommendations have been made
after a detailed inspection and in the interests of facilitating a proper
 implementation of the provisions of the Act, we hereby direct each of
the state governments concerned to implement the recommendations of
the Committee within a period of three months. The Secretary to the
                                                                           H
870            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2016] 8 S.C.R.


A     Committee is requested to forward a copy of this order to the Chief
      Secretaries concerned to secure compliance as directed.
              18. Hence in terms of the above discussion we issue the following
      directions:
             (i) The Union Government shall for the purpose of ensuring
 B    uniformity in the exercise of the rule making power under Section 10(3)
      and Section 16(2) of the Consumer Protection 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;
 c          (ii) The Union Government shall also frame within four months
      model rules prescribing objective norms for implementing the provisions
      of Section I 0( 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        (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
 E 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;
 F
          (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
   Con3umer Protection Act, 1986;
 G          (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 power of administrative control
      vested in the National Commission over the State Commissions under
      Section 24(8)(1 )(iii) and in respect of the administrative control of the
 H
   STATE OF U.P. v. ALL UP CONSUMER PROTECTION BAR                         871
       ASSOCIATION [DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

State Commissions over the District fora in tenns of Section 24(B)(2)      A
as explained in this Judgment to effectively implement the objects and
purposes of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
     19. The proceedings shall now be listed before this Court on 7
March 2017, for further directions and for reporting compliance.
                                                                           B

Nidhi Jain                                             Matter adjourned.