IMPORTANT POINTS:
Every regulation made by the Commission under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the regulation or both Houses agree that the regulation should not be made, the regulation shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so, however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that regulation.

JUDGMENT :

S.Manikumar, J.

Instant writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:

(i) To call for the records leading to Exhibit-P5 and issue a writ of certiorari, or writ in the nature of certiorari and quash Exhibit-P5.

(ii) To declare that Exhibit P5 is illegal and ultra vires to the powers of the 1st respondent and it is passed without application of mind.

(iii) To declare that clause 30 of the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Regulations, 2001 is illegal and ultra vires to the powers conferred under Section 10(2) r/w. Section 29 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

2. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that a sanitation worker of Thalassery Municipality died on 11.09.2005 while she was in service. Her son, respondent No.4, submitted an application on 17.10.2006 for getting pensionary benefits. Along with the application, he produced death certificate, legal heir-ship certificate and the certificate showing his age. Thereafter, he was issued with several communications directing to produce the required documents. According to the petitioner, he has failed to comply with the same.

3. On 26.07.2018, he preferred another application claiming pensionary benefits, which was not considered for the reason that by that time he had crossed the age of 25 years. According to the petitioner, as per Rule 90(3) of Part III KSR, male children aged about 25 years are not entitled to pension. Respondent No.3, brother of the 4th respondent, approached Kerala State Human Rights Commission, respondent No.1, by filing HRMP No.8679/2018/KNR, wherein the Municipality entered appearance and filed a statement on 30/10/2018 refuting the contentions of the 3rd respondent. Similarly, the 3rd respondent preferred another complaint before the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Commission, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner gave a reply and the Commission has passed an order dated 20.12.2018 (Exhibit-P4) directing that the documents have to be produced on time without any delay, and provident fund and other benefits have to be granted to the legal heirs as soon as possible.

4. Meanwhile, Kerala State Human Rights Commission has passed another order dated 19.12.2018 (Exhibit-P5) directing the petitioner to pay the entire benefits to the legal heirs, within two months and report compliance, on production of death certificate.

5. Being aggrieved, instant writ petition is filed on the grounds, inter alia, as under:

A. Exhibit P5 order passed by the member of 1st respondent Commission is totally against the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Section 21 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) deals with Constitution of State Human Rights Commission. The opening word of the Section 21 is that “A State Government may constitute a body to be known as the -------(Name of the State) Human Rights Commission to exercise the powers conferred upon and to perform the functions assigned to a State Commission under this Chapter.” Therefore, a member alone cannot constitute a Commission because, as per S.21(1), the Human Rights Commission is a body with 3 members, including a Chairperson.

B. As per Section 9 of the Act, no act or proceedings of the Commission shall be questioned, or shall be invalidated merely on the ground of existence of any vacancy or defect in the constitution of the Commission. For State Commissions, the above provision is made applicable and, therefore, if the order is not passed by the Chairman and members of the Commission jointly, the order is invalid.

C. Clause 30 of the Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Regulations, 2001 specifies Constitution of Benches. Sub clause (a) is as follows :-

“Subject to such general or special orders as may be issued by the Chairperson, all complaints shall be dealt with by a Single Bench of the Commission. If, however the Bench