In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision striking down three provisions of the 2020 Consumer Protection Rules as unconstitutional. The Court found that unlimited discretion given to Selection Committees to choose appointment procedures, without fixed standards, violated Article 14. Experience requirements of 20 and 15 years for State and District Commission members were also found arbitrary—excessive when judges require only 7–10 years' practice. The Court affirmed that these quasi-judicial bodies, exercising court-like powers, must appoint members through transparent, merit-based processes. It directed that future appointments require 10 years' experience and selection via written examinations (200 marks) plus viva voce (50 marks), establishing objective criteria to prevent political interference and ensure qualified candidates adjudicate consumer disputes fairly.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.