An order passed by a single member of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, in violation of mandatory quorum requirements, is coram non judice and must be set aside.

ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Gaurav Arora, learned counsel or the petitioner.

2. This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the SCDRC, Punjab dated 07.09.2022 in Appeal No. 171 of 2021. The appeal has been dismissed against which the complainant/ petitioner is before this Commission contending that the appellate order cannot be sustained, in as much as, the appeal has been decided by a learned single Member sitting alone. Learned counsel has urged that the order therefore suffers from the vice quoram non-judice and consequently the order deserves to be set aside.

3. Notices had been issued on the short ground, calling upon the respondent to answer the revision petition. The respondent no. 1 was also attempted to be served personally and the report of the dasti service demonstrates that the first respondent refused to receive the notice.

4. Notices on the respondents 2 and 3 stands served as per the office report. In this background there is no impediment in proceeding with the matter to decide it finally, as on this short ground the revision petition has been pending for the past four years. Before proceeding to determine the issue, to ascertain the correct facts, we had passed the orders on 20.04.2026, calling upon the State Commission to tender its report as to whether the impugned order dated 07.09.2022 had been delivered by a two Member Bench and whether the second Member whose name was shown in the cause list had signed on the said order or not.

5. The State Commission has now tendered its report dated 22.05.2026, which is extracted herein under:

“STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH

No. SCDRC/Pb/2026/ 3295 Dated: 22-5-2026

To

The Section Officer (RP Section) National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Upbhokta Naya Bhawan, F Block, General Pool Office Complex INA. New Delhi-110023.

Ref: Order dated 20.04.2026 passed in RP/1375/2022 (Next date of hearing 19.05.2026)

Sub: Revision petition No.NC/RP/1375/2022 with NC/IA/7731/2023 (against the order dated 07.07.2022 in Appeal No. 171/2021 of the State Commission, Punjab).

Sir/Madam,

With reference to your letter dated 27.04.2026 on the subject cited above, it is informed that Ms. Urvashi Agnihotri remained posted as Member in this Commission from 06.10.2021 to 31.01.2023.

The aforesaid First Appeal No. 171 of 2021 was listed before the Hon'ble 5-16 Additional Bench of this Commission. As per record i.e. Peshi Register and concerned file of First Appeal No. 171 of 2021, it has been ascertained that when the arguments were heard in the matter and reserved for orders on 24.08.2022, Ms. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member was not a part of Additional Bench and Sh. H.P.S. Mahal, Judicial Member was sitting alone.

Accordingly when the order dated 07th September, 2022 was pronounced, the same was signed by the Hon'ble Judicial Member only and Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member was not a party to the said decision.

This is for your information and further necessary action, as desired. Copies of Peshi Register and order dated 24.08.2022 are enclosed.

By order of the Hon'ble President Sd/-

Registrar”

6. It is therefore now established that the order was delivered finally dismissing the appeal by a learned single Member only.

7. We find this to be clearly breach of the provisions as well as the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan and Ors. Versus Kamal Travels Kokks International and Ors. 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3718. We therefore set aside the impugned order dated 07.09.2022 and restore the appeal to its original number before the State Commission. The State Commission is requested to proceed with the matter afresh and decide the appeal on merits after putting the parties to notice.

8. The parties are directed to a