Sanjay Karol, CJ. – Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: –

“(a) For directing the respondent to frame rules for appointment on the post of members in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in terms of Proviso to Section 10 (2) of the Consumer Protection Act a like one under Rule 12(A) of the Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 and for extension of the services of the members in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.

(b) For directing the respondents to constitute other bench of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in each and every district in State of Bihar for fulfilling the object and purpose of the Consumer Protection Act in the light of directions issued by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 22155 of 2015 and CWJC No. 150/2013.”

2. We notice that with the passage of time, the present petition has outlived its purpose, inasmuch as the grievances, referred to in the writ petition, stands redressed.

3. However, it is seen that with the passage of time, the scope of the petition was expanded, which is reflected from the orders dated 08.02.2017, 05.03.2018, 28.03.2018 and 28.08.2018, passed in the instant petition. The said orders read as under: –

“Order dated 08.02.2017

This Public Interest Litigation relates to the functioning of the State and the District Consumer Forum in this State. The Consumer Forums were created with the object of providing quick and cheap justice to petty consumers in relation to their day to day dealings. For petty matters, people would not go to courts because that would involve considerable expense and time and as such, the disputes would then remain unresolved. It is to overcome that draw back in respect of petty litigations, to constitute domestic forums, the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was framed. In this PIL, several grievances have been raised, firstly, the absence of Presidents at the District Forum level. Almost one third of the District Forums are headless i.e. without the President. The President is a retired Senior Judicial Officer. The appointment thereof has to be made by a Committee of the President of the State Commission, the Law Secretary and the Principal Secretary of the Department of Food and Consumer Protection. The problem appears to be that all the three are high dignitaries, they rarely have time to sit down together and the result is, the vacancy continues. In absence of the President, the forum is defunct. In view of the aforesaid, we would first direct the President of the State Commission, the Law Secretary and the Principal Secretary of the Department concerned to ensure that they meet regularly over the period of next 45 days and take all steps necessary to complete selection and appointment of the President of the District Forums, who, as noted above, is a retired Senior Judicial Officer. Simultaneously, this very Committee in the said very period, take up the cases of filling up the post of second Member of the District Forum which is occupied by a retired officer of the Administrative Service, and the other Members. There is another problem in relation to those District Forums where there is no President and, therefore, there cannot be recommendation by the District Screening Committee for filling up the post of other two Members other than the Presidents.

2. This has been, to some extent, obviated by the State by tagging two Consumer Forums together. Once that is done, then the President is available for the other forum in this manner. In our view, in the next 45 days all vacancies of the President of the District Forum and the other two Members would be completed. Hopefully, they would all be functional within two months. This was the first problem. We direct accordingly.

3. The second problem is with regard to shortage of staff. A forum may have the Officers but if it does not have the staff, hardly any work can be done. This is where Staff Selection Commission comes into play. We have earlier noticed that the Staff Selection Commission is d