IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the specific provisions of the Constitution, particularly regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 and its superintendence over all courts and tribunals.

JUDGMENT :

Pankaj Bhandari, J.

1. Appellant has preferred this Special Appeal (Writ) aggrieved by Order dated 19.01.2024, whereby writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed and Orders dated 14.06.2022 and 13.04.2023 passed by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short the ‘NCDRC’) were quashed and set aside and the appeal before the NCDRC was restored to its original number subject to payment of Rs.10,000/-.

2. Brief facts of present appeal are that the respondent-JDA preferred an appeal before the NCDRC and on non-appearance of counsel for the JDA, the appeal was dismissed in default vide order dated 14.06.2022. Thereafter, application for recalling of the order dated 14.06.2022 was filed on behalf of respondent- JDA, which was dismissed by NCDRC on 13.04.2023. Against the said order, respondent- JDA preferred SLP before the Apex Court bearing Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary NO(S).30332/2023. The said SLP was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.08.2023 and the Apex Court in light of the judgment of M/S Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suresh Chand Jain & Anr., granted liberty to the petitioners to withdraw the SLP while reserving the right to approach the High Court for appropriate relief. Respondent- JDA thereafter approached the Rajasthan High Court by filing writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the orders passed by the NCDRC. Learned Single Judge vide order dated 19.01.2024 allowed the writ petition and has set aside the orders passed by the NCDRC.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant- Mr. Manoj Khanna that appellant has filed writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the NCDRC. Since the writ petition has been filed under the supervisory jurisdiction, Rajasthan High Court is not having jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition. It is contended that initially a complaint was filed before the State Commission which was allowed. It is also contended that respondent- JDA has wrongly mentioned in the writ petition that the SLP was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, as there is no direction in the order passed by the Apex Court permitting the respondent- JDA to file writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. It is contended that Article 227 of Constitution of India gives power of superintendence to the High Courts over all Courts and Tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction. It is further contended that since the NCDRC is situated at New Delhi and the orders passed by the NCDRC are under challenge by way of filing writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, Rajasthan High Court is not having jurisdiction.

4. It is contended that learned Single Judge has wrongly entertained the writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India and has erred in interpreting the judgments passed in Ibrat Faizan Vs. Omaxe Buildhome Private Limited AIR 2022 SC 2363 and M/S Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suresh Chand Jain & Anr. 2023 INSC 649. It is also contended that all decisions of Tribunals are subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of the High Court within whose jurisdiction the concerned Tribunal falls. It is contended that learned Single Judge has clearly erred in entertaining the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on Hari Vishnu Kamath Vs. Syed Ahmad Ishaque & Ors. AIR 1955 SC 233 & Anr., Central Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences Vs. Bikartan Das & Ors. 2023 SCC OnLine SC 996, Union of India Vs. Alapan Bandyopadhyay, Civil Appeal No.197/2022, Rajnish Kumar Rai Vs. Union of India & Ors. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20054/2023, Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman Gujarat Maritime Board Vs. Asiatic Steel Industries Ltd. & Ors. Civil Appeal No.3807/2020, Kishore Samrite Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2013) 2 SCC 398, Suzuki Parasrampuria Suitings