Ratio
Persons heading an enquiry commission which carry only a day fee and those who are members of the advisory board could be appointed as Chairman of the Consumer Forums.

N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, J.

1. This writ petition is filed challenging the appointment of the third respondent as the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, on the ground that the said appointment is ultra vires to proviso to Section 16(1)(a), 16(1)(b)(e) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Regulation 5 of Consumer Protection Regulations 2005, Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India, besides para 163(IV) & (V) of the Supreme Court decision reported in (2009) 7 SCC 1.

2. Petitioner, who is a practising Advocate, claims herself as an Activist of India Against Corruption Movement and the writ petition is filed under pro bono publico. It is the contention of the petitioner that on 7.3.2012, Mr.Justice M.Thanikachalam, former Judge of this Court, retired as President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and on 8.3.2012 the third respondent Mr.Justice R.Ragupathi, a retired Judge of this Court was appointed as the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. According to the petitioner, the said appointment is in violation of the provisions mentioned above and judgment of the Supreme Court referred above. In the grounds it is further stated that the respondents 1 and 2 have overlooked the fact that the third respondent is already holding the post of Member of the Tamil Nadu Advisory Board, constituted under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and due to holding of the said post, the third respondent cannot function in the full time post of the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and therefore the third respondent cannot be appointed as the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

3. In the supplementary affidavit filed it is further stated that the third respondent was also appointed as One-man Commission of Inquiry to probe the irregularities in construction of new Tamil Nadu Secretariat Complex, by Government Order dated 2.12.2011. According to the petitioner, the Commission of Inquiry will have to work throughout the day. Therefore the recommendation made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice to appoint the third respondent as the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is not proper.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner during his arguments reiterated the contentions raised in the affidavit by reading the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and Regulations, 2005 and supplementary affidavit filed along with the writ petition and cited the following decisions:

a) AIR 1964 SC 1636 (Himansu Kumar Bose v. Jyoti Prokash Mitter)

b) (2009) 7 SCC 1 (N. Kannadasan v. Ajoy Khose)

c) 2009 (1) LW 87 (Anna Mathew v. N. Kannadasan)

d) AIR 1971 Calcutta 354 (E.H.Tippoo v. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India).

5. The learned Advocate General, after taking notice for the second respondent, produced the relevant Government Orders and submitted that the post of the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission alone is the full-time post and the Member of the Advisory Board as well as One-man Commission of Inquiry are not full time/whole time post. The learned Advocate General further submitted that the third respondent is entitled to get only the sitting fee while sitting as Member of the Advisory Board and One-man Commission of Inquiry.

6. We have considered the rival submissions. We have also called for the file relating to the appointment of the third respondent from the Registrar General of this Court and perused the same.

7. The points that arise for consideration in this writ petition are,

(i) Whether the third respondent's appointment as the President of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is in any way conflict with Section 16(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ? and

(ii) Whether the Membership of the third respondent in the Advisory Board under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and the post of One-man Commission of In