Should Retired Judges Appear In Written Exam For Appointments In Consumer Commissions? Supreme Court Seeks Union's Stand

The Supreme Court on Friday (February 2) raised doubts about the viability of its earlier directions which mandate that retired judges should appear in a written examination for appointment as President and Members of State and District Consumer Commissions.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a batch of Special Leave Petitions filed against the Bombay High Court's judgment which struck down Rule 6(1) Of Consumer Protection Rules 2020.During the hearing, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union Government, referred to the direction passed by the Supreme Court in its March 2023 judgment that the appointment of President and Members of the State and District Commissions shall be made based on their performance in a written test consisting of two papers of 100 marks each on topics of General Knowledge and current affairs; Knowledge of the Constitution of India; Knowledge of various Consumer Laws (Paper I) and 1 written essay on issues of trade and commerce/ public affair as well as one case study (Paper II).Underscoring that a retired High Court judge is appointed as the President of the State Commission, SG remarked, "No respectable judge, who has self-respect would appear in an examination where his General Knowledge, Knowledge of Constitutional Law, and his ability to draft orders would be tested, after having exercised the prerogative writ of the Court." The SG wondered how GK questions like "who is the fastest runner in the history of the world?" help in assessing the ability for judicial adjudication.Seemingly agreeing with the concerns raised by the SG, CJI Chandrachud said that making retired judges appear for exams was "very far-fetched."The CJI added that examinations in general should test the potential of the candidate for analytical thinking rather than mere rote learning. Giving the example of changes in the examination of Law Clerks cum Research Assistants engaged by the Supreme Court, the CJI said “ We used to have an examination, tell us from the code- what are certain provisions of the Penal Code etc. Eventually, we changed the format of the exam because we realised that it was irrelevant, you are required basically to understand what is the potential of that person, are you able to analyse, summarise thousands of pages of SLP into 2 paragraphs?".Noting that the present examination requirements have become counter-productive to the purpose of having meritorious ex-judiciary members as part of the State and District Commissions for the Consumer Dispute Redressal, the CJI opined, “To make somebody who is select grade district judge appear for an examination, post-retirement... it really defeats the purpose actually.”The bench asked SG to inform the considered stand of the Union on this matter, after a discussion with the Secretary of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs. The CJI suggested, “ If you can then sit with the Secretary of Consumer Affairs and maybe call him and ask him what you want to do, because we get a considered position of the Government of India on what has happened as a result of this. You may collect the data, what are the vacancies, what is the feedback of the government etc” The SG acknowledging the same replied, “We are in the process of collection of data” The bench in its order dictated today, mentioned, “Mr Tushar Mehta, Learned Solicitor General would seek instructions from the Union Government on the necessity of holding examinations, particularly for posts held by former judges of the High Court or as the case may be Judicial Officers.” The matter will now be heard on Monday, i.e. 5.2.2024 The Supreme Court Directions Given On March 3, 2023 The Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice MR Shah and Justice MM Sundresh, on March 3, 2023 upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) to quash the provisions of Consumer Protection Rules, 2020, framed by Central Government u/s 101 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, which prescribe a minimum professional experience of 20 years and 15 years for adjudicating members to the State consumer commissions and District forums respectively and which did away with the requirement of a written exam for appointment. Exercising power under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Bench directed"Till the amendments are made, in order to do complete justice under A. 142 we direct that in future a person having Bachelor's degree from a recognised university and who is a person of ability, integrity standing and having special knowledge and professional experience of not less than 10 years in consumer affairs, law, public affairs, administration etc. shall be treated as qualified for appointment as President and member of State and District Commission We also direct that for appointment the appointment shall be based on the performance in 2 papers. Qualifying marks in the papers shall be 50% and there must be a viva for 50 marks...

Should Retired Judges Appear In Written Exam For Appointments In Consumer Commissions? Supreme Court Seeks Union's Stand

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Tags