High court stays Haryana govt orders curbing consumer commission's authority, seeks explanation on chief's security withdrawal

Time of India

6 days ago

1
2
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has intervened in an escalating standoff between the Haryana govt and the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, staying all state orders issued against the commission's decisions.
The intervention follows a petition filed by the commission, led by its president, former high court Justice T P S Mann, alleging "day-to-day interference" from the state govt.
Justice Mann claimed such actions paralysed operations, emboldened staff to defy lawful directions, and undermined the authority of the commission.
In its order, the high court also directed the state to explain the withdrawal of Justice Mann's security.
Justice Suvir Sehgal passed the orders after hearing the petition filed by the commission against what was described as "unlawful and jurisdiction-less" interventions by senior govt officials.
Counsel representing the commission contended that Justice Mann was appointed commission president on Dec 29, 2018, on the high court's recommendation. He is recognised as the administrative head of both the state and district consumer commissions under Section 70 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
The Simple Morning Habit for a Flatter Belly After 50!
Lulutox
Undo
This position grants him authority over administrative decisions, including staff discipline and postings.
However, according to the petition, the principal secretary of the food, civil supplies and consumer affairs department has increasingly overstepped into the commission's domain in recent months. Justice Mann's plea alleged that the principal secretary interfered in transfer and disciplinary proceedings, bypassing the commission's statutory control.
The petition cites multiple incidents. On Jan 20, the state govt ordered the transfer of Phool Singh, president, Palwal District Consumer Commission, with Neena Sandhu, president, Ambala commission. Sandhu contested the order in the high court, which stayed her transfer, reaffirming that district commission presidents fall under the administrative authority of the state commission president.
In another case, a member of the Panipat district commission was transferred to Jind following a complaint of misuse of powers.
The commission asserted this was a lawful disciplinary move, but the principal secretary reversed it on July 21—allegedly without jurisdiction.
The petition also mentioned the case of Gaurav, a deputy superintendent in the state commission, accused of repeated misconduct and misbehaviour with senior officers, including Justice Mann himself. As per the petition, on June 16, Gaurav allegedly confronted and verbally abused the president in the presence of judicial and administrative staff, seizing official records.
He was later charge-sheeted, shown CCTV footage of his misconduct, and transferred to Yamunanagar to prevent influencing the proceedings.
The principal secretary, however, stayed the inquiry proceedings and cancelled the transfer.
The petition further referred to a March 6, 2019, letter from the Haryana chief secretary clarifying that the state govt has "no say" in the administration or justice delivery of the quasi-judicial consumer commission.
Justice Mann alleged that the principal secretary's continued interference has emboldened subordinate staff to disobey commission orders, thereby obstructing the administration of justice.
He also pointed to the alleged political links of some staff members, claiming these were being leveraged to shield them from disciplinary action.
While staying all the orders passed by the principal secretary of the department against the decisions of the commission, the high court has directed the state govt to file a response to the contentions raised by the petitioner.
During the hearing of the matter, advocate Pardeep Solath, while representing the commission, apprised the court that the security given to the president, Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, in terms of the condition of his appointment letter, was withdrawn by the govt. He stated a letter dated July 28 was addressed to the ADGP, Haryana, in this regard.
"A copy of the letter be supplied to the state counsel who shall file an affidavit explaining the reason for withdrawal of security," observed the bench in its order while seeking an explanation from the state.
MSID:: 123187548 413 |
Stay updated with the latest local news from your
city
on
Times of India
(TOI). Check upcoming
bank holidays
,
public holidays
, and current
gold rates
and
silver prices
in your area.
Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with
Raksha Bandhan wishes
,
messages
and
quotes
!