Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kamal Travels Kokks International vs State (Civil Supplies) & Ors on 14 March, 2018
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18 / 2012
Kamal Travels Kokks International, Through Prop., Pramod Varyani
S/o Shri Bherumal Varyani Proprietor, aged about 49 years, B/c
Sindhi,R/o A-16, Model Town, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur (Raj.),
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through The Secretary, Food, Civil
Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Through its Registrar, Handloom Haveli, Ashok marg, C-
Scheme, First Floor, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. The State Commission, Consumer Disputes for Rajasthan,
Circuit Bench, Jodhpur (Raj.)
4. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal forum, Jodhpur
(Raj.)
5. Vinay Abhichandani, S/o Late Shri Heera Lal Abhichandani,
B/c Sindhi, R/o 379, Infront of Sardarpura Police Station, 4 th
C Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Raj.).
6. Pooja Abhichandani, W/o Vinay Abhichandani, B/c Sindhi,
R/o 379, Infront of Sardarpura Police Station, 4 th C Road,
Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Raj.).
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.P.C.Solanki.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Yashwant Mehta.
Mr.Hardik Daga for Mr.S.S.Ladrecha, AAG.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order 14/03/2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.
Through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has approached this Court (2 of 2) [CW-18/2012] challenging the order dated 7.12.2011 passed by State Consumer Commission, Circuit Bench, Jodhpur in Appeal No.38/2011 on the ground that only one Member of the Commission heard and decided the appeal preferred by the petitioner and rejected the same and as such, the order is without jurisdiction and has no sanctity in the eye of law.
Shri Yashwant Mehta learned counsel representing the contesting respondents candidly concedes that the order passed by the State Consumer Commission is without jurisdiction because the quorum thereof was not complete. At least, the Chairman and one Member were required to hear the matter so as to constitute the quorum for passing a valid decision as per Section 16(1)(b)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
In this view of the matter, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned order dated 7.12.2011 passed by the State Consumer Commission is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the State Consumer Commission, who shall rehear the matter and pass a fresh judgment thereupon preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The parties shall remain present before the State Consumer Commission on 9.4.2018.
(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.
/tarun goyal/ 98