Mr. R.V. Rama Subramaniam v. The State Of Mah. Thr. Its Secty And 5 Otrs

WP635-09 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 635/2009 (R.V. RAME SUBRAMANIAM VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri D.P. Thakare, Additional G.P. for the R-1. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : JANUARY 18 , 2017.

By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a declaration that the provisions of Rule 6 of the Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 making Marathi language mandatory are per se illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioner has sought a direction against the respondent no.2-Forum to accept the complaint of the petitioner in English language. The cause for filing the writ petition must have been rendered infructuous due to the subsequent development and passage of time. We do not find anything in Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or the Rules or the Regulations framed thereunder that requires the filing of the complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act in Marathi only. In fact, Model Form nos.II and III pertaining to filing of complaints under Section 12 of the Act appear to be in English language.

Since the grievance of the petitioner would not survive any longer, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

JUDGE JUDGE APTE