City
Epaper

'Why create posts...": SC slams states on consumer panel vacancies

By IANS | Updated: August 11, 2021 17:05 IST

New Delhi, Aug 11 The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong objection at vacancies in state consumer disputes ...

Open in App

New Delhi, Aug 11 The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong objection at vacancies in state consumer disputes redressal commissions, saying that the states are defeating laws enacted for welfare of people.

What is purpose of creating posts and not filling them, it said, asking all states and Union Territories to fill all vacancies within a period of eight weeks.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy, while hearing counsel for various state governments, remarked: "Are you waiting for an auspicious occasion to take steps.

"We just want persons in positions. States defeating laws enacted for welfare of people. What is purpose of creating posts and not manning them?"

The bench noted it appears that some of the states and UTs have not even set up selection committees, and directed it should be done within 4 weeks.

It added that all states should notify rules within two weeks and if there are large number of vacancies, then "we direct that all vacancies be advertised within two weeks".

All vacancies, whether be the post for chairman or members, should be filled within 8 weeks from Wednesday, it said.

The bench also asked the Centre to fill vacancies in national consumer commissions, noting that there are seven vacancies at the national forum.

"If we have asked states, we must ask Centre too. You (Centre) raise hopes, aspirations that grievances of public will be addressed..".

The bench directed all state secretaries to notify the rules in two weeks.

"We are not giving extensions. Enough time was given to set houses in order. Time will be fixed now."

It said that if rules are not notified in two weeks, then model rules made by Centre will automatically apply for the respective commissions.

The bench noted that as per Section 42 of the Consumer Protection Act, each state commission consists of a chairman and not less than four members.

The top court passed these directions in its suo motu case regarding the inaction of the governments in appointing president and members/staff of districts and state consumer disputes redressal commission and inadequate infrastructure across India.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Tags: unionNew DelhiSanjay Kishan KaulSupreme CourtHrishikesh RoyThe new delhi municipal councilDelhi south-westNew-delhi
Open in App

Related Stories

NationalUnnao Rape Case: 'I Have Faith in SC,' Says Survivor After CBI Moves Apex Court

National‘Harassing Crores for a Few’: Ex-CEC S.Y. Quraishi Criticises SIR Process at Lokmat National Conclave 2025

NationalLokmat National Conclave 2025: Manoj Jha Flags ‘Freebies Culture’, Says Elections Are No Longer Fair

NationalPregnant Sunali Khatoon and Her Son, Deported as Bangladeshis, to Be Brought Back to India, Centre Tells Supreme Court

BusinessVodafone Idea Shares Jump by 2% As Government Reviews AGR Relief Proposal

Politics Realted Stories

MaharashtraRaj Thackeray Claims Evidence Against 65 Unopposed Mahayuti Candidates, MNS to Legal Action

MumbaiWho Is Tejasvee Ghosalkar? Shiv Sena UBT Leader and Former Corporator Joins BJP Ahead of BMC Polls

MaharashtraSanjay Raut Says Sena–MNS Already Together No Need Others Permission

MaharashtraBig Jolt to Sharad Pawar as Salil Deshmukh, Son of Anil Deshmukh, Quits NCP-SP

PoliticsEknath Shinde Issues Strict No-Crossover Order After Meeting Amit Shah; Directive Communicated to All Shiv Sena Leaders