Karnataka HC Declines Former Consumer Commission Members’ Bid To Continue Until Fresh Appointments, As All Had Turned 65

The petitioners, former Presidents or Members of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions, sought directions permitting them to continue in their posts until fresh appointments were made.

They relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Ganesh Kumar Rajeshwar Rao v. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye and the Karnataka Division Bench’s order in State of Karnataka v. Savitha B. Pattanashetti.

Their appointments were for five years or until they attained 65 years of age, whichever occurred earlier; the Court recorded that all petitioners had attained 65.

The petitions invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and 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) (Amendment) Rules, 2022.

The Court considered the Supreme Court’s direction in Ganesh Kumar Rajeshwar Rao v. Mahendra Bhaskar Limaye, (2025) 8 SCC 634, that incumbent Commission members continue until fresh selections are made.

It also applied the Division Bench’s order in State of Karnataka v. Savitha B. Pattanashetti, W.A. No. 1583/2026 (25 September 2026), which permitted the State to relieve or reappoint the relevant members only until the Selection Committee’s recommendation or their attaining 65 years, whichever occurred earlier.

The Court treated the Division Bench’s order as governing the petitioners’ claims.

That order limited any continuation to the earlier of the Selection Committee’s recommendation or the member’s attainment of 65 years.

Because the petitioners had all reached 65, the condition for any further continuation was no longer met.

The Court therefore concluded that no further consideration or relief was available.

It disposed of all five writ petitions accordingly.