Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1 All Ghaziabad Development Authority V. R.C. Saxenaand others 443
cases in view of Division Bench Case Dr.
Manvendra Mishra-High Court refused to
exercise its direction.
Held: Para 14
As already discussed, the Act is a
complete code in regard to redressal of
grievances (complaints) of the consumer
and also in regard to appeal and revision
against the order passed by the State
Commission and other authorities, and
as such the extra ordinary writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, which is a
discretionary jurisdiction, should not be
invoked in such matters.
Case law discussed:
(2005) 6 Supreme Court Cases 499; (2003) 2
SCC 107; (2004) 4 Supreme Court Cases 268;
(2006) 5 S.C.C. 469; (2000) 1 UPLBEC 702;
2009 (2) ACR 2349
(Delivered by Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J. )
1. Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and perused the record.
The learned counsel for petitioner
submitted that the instant writ petition has
been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for quashing the order
dated 9.8.2010 passed by the Uttar Pradesh
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
(hereinafter referred to as the 'State
Commission') in revision no.109 of 2006,
whereby the State Commission dismissed
the petitioner's revision and confirmed the
order dated 28.4.2006 of the District Forum,
Ghaziabad. The learned counsel for the
petitioner further submitted that the State
Commission has passed the aforesaid order
in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction
under section 17(1)(b) of The Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to
as 'the Act'), therefore, the order so passed is
not appealable before the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
(hereinafter referred to as the 'National
Commission'). According to section 19 of
the Act only an order passed under sub
clause (i) of clause (a) of section 17 of the
Act is appealable before the National
Commission, therefore, the instant writ
petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is maintainable.
2. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986
has been enacted to provide for better
protection of the interests of consumers and
for that purpose to make provision for the
establishment of consumer councils and
other authorities for the settlement of
consumers' disputes and for matters
connected therewith. The Act has
provisions for constitution of District
Forum, State Commission and National
Commission, respectively, at the District
level, State level and the National level for
redressal of the grievances (complaints) of
the consumer.
3. The National Commission has
power of revision and that power has been
very specifically conferred on the National
Commission under section 21 (b) of the
Act. Moreso, section 21 (a) (ii) of the Act
has conferred jurisdiction on the National
Commission to entertain appeals against the
orders of any State Commission but there is
no specification as to which of the orders of
the State Commission is appealable under
section 21 (1)(a) of the Act. Therefore, the
provisions of section 21 (a) (ii) of the Act
have to be read alongwith the provisions of
section 19 of the Act. As such the orders
passed by the State Commission in exercise
of original jurisdiction under section 17 (1)
(a) (i) of the Act is appealable before the
National Commission. If the provisions of
section 21 (a)(ii) of the Act is read in
isolation, each and every order passed by
the State Commission is appealable before