SC to consider whether salary of State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission members should be the same as district judges

The Supreme Court in the case In Re Pay Allowance of the Members of The U.P.

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, wherein the matter was listed before the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha, concerning the

salary of State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission members for 8th December, 2022. The batch of petitions filled prayed that

the salary of State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission members should be the same as District Judges.

In the present case, one of the petitions filled by a retired District Judge, where

in seeking for an extension of the tenure of the members of the State Consumer Redressal Commissions. However, the retired judge

in question had been appointed as a member of State Consumer Redressal Commission. It was stated by him

that as per the new rules, the maximum age prescribed for

a member was 65 years and the same shall be increased to 67 years.

The counsel, Additional Solicitor General Balbir Singh appearing for the Union

submitted that the decision of Madras Bar Association

has nothing to do with this. The same is covered under Consumer Protection Act. It

has been stated by him that the same is extended till 67 years and give me two years.

Madras Bar isn’t dealing with consumer forums. He

is getting retired as a district judge and he has agreed to the retirement age which is being a65 years. Further, the bench refused for extending the tenure and has decided to list the matter pertaining to the salary issue on 8th December 2022.

While passing the order, the bench of CJI Chandrachud stated that, we will

be dealing with the salary issue separately. The petitioner being 65 years old, the maximum age under the Act. Hence, the court cannot

grant the relief. The court dismissed the petition. We will keep the issue early and

hear it on 8th December 2022, on the salary issue.