← Library
Calcutta High CourtWPA(P)/9/2024disposed

Mr.Vishal Kumar Biswas v. The Lt.Governor And ORS.

2025-03-10Hon'Ble Justice Soumen Sen,Hon'Ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA(P)/9/2024 Mr. Vishal Kumar Biswas Vs.

The Lieutenant Governor and others Ms. Anjili Nag, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Adarsh Ilango ... for the petitioner Mr. Tulsi Lall ... for the UOI Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the Administration March 10, 2025 [SR] Item No.1.

1.

The criteria for appointment of President and Members in the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (DCDRC) is under consideration in a Special Leave Petition being Civil Appeal No.9982 of 2024 (Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukar vs. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye).

2.

In the writ petition, the grievance seems to be that due to vacancy in the post of President and Members of DCDRC, large number of consumers are being affected and their grievances are not being redressed.

3.

In the proceeding, several orders were passed, the last of which was passed on 5th February, 2024 by which the resolution of the selection committee for appointment of President and female member in the DCDRC dated 8th January, 2025 was taken into consideration and Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned senior advocate appearing for the Administration was directed to file a report in the form of an affidavit disclosing the stand of the Administration on the

proposal made by the Selection Committee dated 8th January, 2025.

4.

It appears from the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 7th March, 2024 that for the appointment of President and Members of DCDRC, the requirement of holding a written examination and viva voce was relaxed for the time being. However, during the pendency of this writ petition, as fairly pointed out by Ms. Anjili Nag, learned senior advocate for the petitioner that the hearing was concluded on 6th February, 2025 and judgment was reserved.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, we do not propose to pass any order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

6.

In view of the aforesaid development, we are not considering the prayers made in the writ petition on merits. 7.

The report filed by the Administration is taken on record. ( Soumen Sen, J. ) ( Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)