V.N.Parthiban, v. The Principal Secretary to Government,

ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to extend the tenure of the petitioner as Member of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore with the existing service conditions beyond

23.03.2026 until the completion of the recruitment process after the New Rules, to be notified by the Union of India, in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 21.05.2025 in Civil Appeal No.9982 of 2024 in Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukkar and others Vs.Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye.

¶2Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side. With the consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶3The brief facts of the case is as follows:

3.1. The petitioner has been selected as Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore through Government Order dated

18.03.2022 and appointed vide proceedings dated 21.03.2022 and took charge on 24.03.2022. The petitioner's recruitment and appointment were made in Page3 of 7 accordance with the Consumer Protection (Qualification for Appointment, Method of Recruitment, Procedure of Appointment, Term of Office, Resignation and Removal of the President and Members of the State Commission and District Commission) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as -the 2020 Rules). As per Rule 10 of the 2020 Rules (as amended in 2022), every member of the State Commission and the President and every Member of the District Commission shall hold office for a term of four years or upto the age of sixty~five years, whichever is earlier and shall be eligible for reappointment for another term of four years subject to the age limit of sixty five years and such reappointment shall be made on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee. The petitioner's tenure as Member is due to end on 23.03.2026. However, the petitioner is entitled to continue till the recruitment process under the New Rules to be notified and hence, the present Writ Petition for the aforesaid relief.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the decision of the Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukar and Ors vs Mehendra Bhaskar Limaye and Ors reported in (2025) 8 SCC 634, wherein directions with regard to the status of appointment to the post of Presidents and Members of the State and District Commissions has been issued. The relevant direction is as follows: Page4 of 7 Non~Judicial Members of the State Commission and the Members of the District Commission, who have given the written examination and viva voce a) If already appointed and serving, they shall be allowed to continue in service for the entirety of their tenure. In the event of their tenure ending before the completion of the recruitment process under the new rules to be notified, their appointment shall be allowed to continue until the completion of the said recruitment process.

Thus, it is clear that in the event of completion of tenure before the completion of the recruitment process, their appointment shall be allowed to continue till the completion of recruitment process. Hence, he prayed to allow the Writ Petition.

¶5The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner's tenure is over by 23.03.2026 and as such, he cannot be permitted to continue till the new recruitment to the post of Member of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore, however, he has not disputed the facts of the case and also fairly admitted the contentions put forth by the learned Page5 of 7 counsel for the petitioner.

¶6In the case on hand, the petitioner was appointed as Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore on 21.03.2022. His tenure as per Rule 10 of the Rules, shall hold office for a term of four years or upto the age of sixty five years, whichever is earlier. Now, the petitioner's tenure is due to end on 23.03.2026. But so far, there is no recruitment to the post of Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore. In the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court as stated supra, the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to continue the service as Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore till the completion of recruitment process under the new Rules.

¶7With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

20-02-2026 MRN Note: Issue Order Copy by 23.02.2026 Page6 of 7 To

¶1The Principal Secretary to Government, Department Co-operation Food and Consumer Protection, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The Registrar, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, TNPSC Road,V.O.C.Nagar (Behind TNPSC), Park Town,Chennai-600 003 Page7 of 7

M.DHANDAPANI, J. MRN WP No. 7053 of 2026 20-02-2026

Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 7053 of 2026 V.N.Parthiban ..Petitioner Vs 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Registrar, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, TNPSC Road, V.O.C.Nagar (Behind TNPSC), Park Town, Chennai-600 003 ..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to extend the tenure of the petitioner as Member of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuddalore, with the existing service conditions, beyond 23.03.2026 until the completion of recruitment process after the new rules to be notified by the Union of India, in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 21.05.2025 in Civil Appeal No.9982 of 2024 in Ganeshkumar Rajeshwarrao Selukkar and others Vs.Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye. Page2 of 7 For Petitioner : Mr.M.Velmurugan For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajendiran Additional Government Pleader