Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040009322023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/326/2023 M/s Ghosh Brothers Autosales Pvt. Ltd. A Private Limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act and having its registered office at TR Phukan Road, Chiring Chapori, Dibrugarh 786001, Assam and it is being represented herein by one of its Directors Sri Pranab Kumar Ghosh VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 3 Ors. Represented by the Secretary to the Department of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, 6JC WH8, Krishi Bhawan, Rafi Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi, Delhi 110001 2:THE STATE OF AP Age: 0 Occupation : Represented by the Secretary to the Department of Consumer Affairs Ministry of Legal Metrology and Consumer Affairs 4M3P 4R7 C Sector Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 791110 3:Binam Messar Age: 0 Occupation : S/o Tameng Messar Resident of Officers Colony PO/PS Pasighat District East Siang Arunachal Pradesh. PIN 791102 4:the Deputy Commissioner (Certificate Officer) Age: 0 Occupation : Page No.# 2/6 East Siang District Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh PIN 79110 Advocate for the Petitioner : A Biswas, Tabit Tapak,1 R Kalita Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Juel Saroh,Toni Dameng,Bomnya Kamdak,Nalo Pada,Marto Kato,DSGI Linked Case : WP(C)/123/2024 M/s Tayo Enterprise Age: 0 Occupation : Address:proprietor Tayo Tallom Rending Rending Ground Floor 03 Barapani Bazaar Po and PS Naharlagun Papumpare District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP and 3 Ors Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by the Secretary Department of Consumer Affairs Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar 79111 2:The State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by the Registrar State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh 791111 3:The New India Assurance Co Ltd Age: 0 Occupation : Page No.# 3/6 Address:Guwahati Regional Office G S Road Lachit Nagar Guwahati Assam 781007 4:The Presiding Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Address:District Consumer Redressal Commission Papumpare District Arunachal Pradesh 791111 ------------ Advocate for : Gautam Phukan Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for The State of AP and 3 Ors: Advocate , , , appearing for 2, 3, 4, respectively. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER Date : 20.05.2025 Both these writ petitions have been filed with a similar grievance. The grievance is with regard to non-consideration of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioners under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, primarily, due to the absence of the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Arunachal Pradesh. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that complaints were filed by the private respondents under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 before the concerned District Consumer Redressal Commission, in which orders were passed in favour of the complainant/consumer. The said orders are the subject matter of appeals preferred by the petitioners before the State Commission. Page No.# 4/6 However, due to the retirement of former President of the State Commission, the appeals have not been able to be taken up. At the same time, Bakijai proceedings and coercive action have been initiated against the petitioners herein, and having no other alternative, the extra-ordinary jurisdiction conferred upon this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been invoked. 3. In both these petitions, there are interim orders in favour of the petitioners not to take any coercive action. 4. I have heard Shri A. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C)326(AP)2023. I have also heard Ms. P. Sangeeta, learned State Counsel for the State respondents and Shri J. Saroh, learned counsel for the private respondent. 5. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner and the private respondent in WP(C)123(AP)2024 are absent, since an analogous issue is involved, the writ petitions are taken up for consideration together and are being disposed of by this common order. 6. As already narrated above, the remedy prayed for in these petitions is a limited one which relates to non-functioning of the State Commission due to lack of the presiding officer. 7. Ms. Sangeeta, learned State Counsel has, however, submitted that steps are being taken for the appointment of the President and the Members, and in this regard, she has placed on record a recent communication dated 16.05.2025, issued by the State Commission, wherein the Government letter regarding such appointments has been referred and also that the Department has initiated the process of appointment of the President of the State Page No.# 5/6 Commission. 8. A litigant cannot be left remediless if he is aggrieved by any other(s) passed by the District Commission and such remedy is a statutory one which is provided under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The inability to have the grievances redressed by the State Commission is only on account of non-availability of the Presiding Officer of the State Commission, inasmuch as the earlier Presiding Officer had retired on attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter, it is an admitted fact that no Presiding Officer has been appointed. Under such circumstances, the petitioners in the instant cases cannot be left in a situation, wherein they are not even able to raise their grievance against the respective orders of the District Forum. It is a different matter altogether as to whether the grounds of appeal are accepted by the State Commission or not. However, it is of significant importance that the petitioners should be able to be in a position so that the grounds which have been taken to challenge the respective orders of the District forum are considered by the appropriate appellate authority. 9. In view of the aforesaid discussions, this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be served if a direction of the following nature is passed. It is accordingly, directed that till the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum Arunachal Pradesh is made functional by appointment of the Presiding Officer and the Members, no coercive action is to be taken against the petitioners in the respective cases. In fact, interim orders have already been passed in both these writ petitions, which are made absolute by this order. 10. It is also clarified that the present protection would be operative till such constitution of the State Commission and once the Commission starts Page No.# 6/6 functioning and the appeal preferred by the respective petitioners are taken into consideration, the interim order would cease to have its force. It is clarified that the petitioners, while pressing their respective appeals would also be at liberty to pray for necessary interim order(s), which, if done, would be considered by the State Commission in accordance with law. 11. Both the writ petitions accordingly, stand allowed. It is also clarified that no opinion has been expressed by this Court on the inter se merits of the dispute. 12. A copy of the communication dated 16.05.2025, placed before this Court by the learned State Counsel, is made part of the record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant