( 1 ) IN these applications various provisions of the Consumer protection Act have been questioned. In writ Petition Nos. 10935, 10939 and 11109 of 2001, the petitioners had questioned the validity of Sections 2 (d), (e), (f), (g), sections 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24 (b) and 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the said Act ) whereas in the other writ petitions the vires of Section 27 of the said Act is in question.

( 2 ) THE main thrust of the submission of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners led by Sri S Ramchandra rao principally are: (I) Having regard to the composition of the different Commissions, which are manned by, lay persons and as the decisions of the majority of the members who may be laymen would prevail over the decisions of a judicial member/chairman, the provisions of the said Act must be held to be violative of Article 21 of the constitution of India. (II) As an appeal is provided to the supreme Court from an order passed by the National Commission, by necessary implication, the power of judicial review of this Court has been taken away. (III) Since a new offence has been created by reason of Section 21