JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. - The petitioner is a retired Judge of this Court and has preferred this Writ petition for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the impugned letter dated 16.05.2023 whereby the claim of the petitioner for granting the benefit of amended Rule 10 of the Consumer Protection (Qualification for Appointment, Method of Recruitment, Procedure of Appointment, Term of Office, Resignation and Removal of the President and Members of the State Commission and District Commission) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 2020') has been denied AND for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make necessary modification in the order of appointment/notification dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-2) issued to the petitioner in consonance with the amended Rule 10 of 2020.

2. The brief facts of this case which need to be noticed are that the petitioner, who is a retired Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, was appointed as the President of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'State Commission') on 13.08.2021. Her appointment order reflects that she was appointed as President of the State Commission in terms of the Rules of 2020 notified under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2019') on whole time basis for a term of 4 years, or till she attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier, from the date she assumes the charge of the post.

3. In terms of the said order, she joined on 13.08.2021 and presently holding the charge of the President of the State Commission.

4. Rule 10 of the Rules of 2020 provides as under: -

'10. Term of office of President or Member:-

The President and every member of the State Commission and the District Commission shall hold office for a term of four years or up to the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier and shall be eligible for reappointment for another term of four years subject to the age limit of sixty-five years, and such reappointment is made on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee. "

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the qualifications, procedure of appointment, terms of office, reservation and removal of the President and Members of the State Commission, was governed by the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1986') wherein as per Section 16(3), the term of office of the President and the Members of the State Commission was 5 years or upto the age of 67 years, whichever is earlier. The Act of 1986 was repealed by the Act of 2019 which was brought into force w.e.f. 20.07.2020. Section 43 of the Act of 2019, empowered the Central Government to make the Rules by notification for laying down the qualifications of the appointment, method of recruitment, procedure of appointment, term of office, reservation and removal of the President and Members of the State Commission and accordingly, the Rules of 2020 were framed which provided Rule 10 (Supra), reproduced hereinabove.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Rule 3(1) of the Rules of 2020, a person could be appointed as a President who is or has been a Judge of the High Court. Thus, a sitting Judge or a retired Judge of the High Court is qualified for appointment, and the petitioner who had retired as a Judge of this Court on 09.01.2021, on attaining the age of 62 years, was appointed as a President of the State Commission on 13.08.2021 at the age of 62 years and 7 months. However, it was realized that usually, a retired High Court Judge is appointed and therefore, he or she can never complete 4 years' tenure as he or she retired as a Judge at the age of 62 years and further it takes some time to be appointed after undergoing the selection process. Thus, an anomaly under the Rules was felt by the Rule making authorities. Further, it was also noticed that the Member