SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 32178

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
R.Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
The Principal Secretary – Respondent



##PAGE1##

WP No. 7179 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

WP No. 7179 of 2026

R.Vijaya

D/o.K.Ramalingam,

No.5/38, P-Block,

Post office street, M.M.D.A Colony,

Arumbakkam, Chennai-600 106

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Principal Secretary

Department of Civil Supplies, Food and

Consumer Protection,

Government of Tamilnadu,

Chennai-600 009.

2. The Registrar

State consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission,

Frazer Bridge Road,

VOC Nagar (Behind TNPSC)

Park Town, Chennai-600 003

..Respondent(s)

The writ petitioner has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of

India, to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the

tenure of the petitioner as Member of District consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission, Tiruvannamalai, with the existing service conditions until the

completion of selection process as per new Rules in terms of the judgment of

the Honourable Supreme Court of India In Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukar

and Ors. Vs. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye and Ors Civil Appeal No.9982/2024

dated 21.05.2025.

__________

Page1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/03/2026 07:25:24 pm )

##PAGE2##

WP No. 7179 of 2026

For Petitioner(s): Ms.Theebekaa T

For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Ganesan, AGP

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to

extend the tenure of the petitioner as Member of District consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Tiruvannamalai, with the existing service conditions

until the completion of selection process as per new Rules in terms of the

judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of India In Ganeshkumar

Rajeshwarrao Selukar and Ors. Vs. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye and Ors Civil

Appeal No.9982/2024 dated 21.05.2025.

2. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side. With the consent

of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage

itself.

3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

3.1. The petitioner was recruited and appointed through a rigorous

selection process comprising a written examination and viva voce in the year

2022 conducted by the Selection Committee constituted by this Court in

accordance with the consumer protection (Qualification for appointment,

method of Recruitment, Procedure of Appointment, Term of office, Resignation

__________

Page2 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/03/2026 07:25:24 pm )

##PAGE3##

WP No. 7179 of 2026

and removal of the Presidents and Members of the State Commission and

District (Commission) Rules 2020 vide order dated 21.03.2022 in Proc.

Rc.No.A1/631/2022 in pursuant to GO.Ms.No.33 Cooperation, Food &

Consumer protection (H1) Department dated 18.03.2022 and order of the

Hon’ble President SCDRC, Chennai dated 21.03.2022 and serving in the above

said post since 28.03.2022 to till date and completing the tenure on 29.03.2026.

The petitioner’s tenure comes to an end on 29.03.2026. On completion of 4

years as per Rule 10 of the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020 as per the

directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ganeshkumar Rajeshwararrao

Selukar & others Vs. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye & others in Vil Appeal

No.9982 of 2024 dated 21.05.2025, a.the petitioner as member of the DCDRC

shall be allowed to complete her tenure in entirety, b) in the event of her tenure

ending before the completion of the recruitment process under the new Rules to

be notified, their appointment shall be allowed to continue until the completion

of the said recruitment process. The petitioner has made given her

representation to the first respondent on 27.01.2026 and on 29.01.2026 to the

second respondent seeking extension of her tenure until the framing of the new

rules and completion of the recruitment process. However, no action has been

taken till date and hence, the present Writ Petition for the aforesaid relief.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court

to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganeshkumar

__________

Page3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top