Advocates' Association Approaches Bombay HC Against National Consumer Commission's Clean Chit To Judge Who Decided His Own Case

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's (NCRDC) order reads like a "character certificate" without giving the complainant a chance to be heard or even considering other complaints against the same member judge, the petition filed under Article 226 states.

"Faith of the public at large gets lost on account of such orders which are passed," the petition adds, seeking re-consideration of the Association's complaint and directions to withdraw charge from Dr Santosh Kakade, in the interim. He serves as a non-judicial member of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC).

Last week, a division bench of Justices SV Gangapurwala and Justice RN Laddha heard the plea and directed the state government to submit the preliminary enquiry report submitted to the NCDRC.

On August 10, 2021 Dr Santosh Kakade, as member judge of the SCDRC dismissed a consumer appeal for want of prosecution against himself, recording non-appearance of both parties despite notices being issued.

However, on February 15 this year, after a certified copy of the order was sought, acting-president Kakade, sitting along with a judicial member at Aurangabad, took up the matter and reversed the dismissal, calling the order a 'mistake'. The 2002 appeal against the district forum's order was restored.

Following this, the Advocates' Association wrote to the NCRDC seeking appropriate action. In response, Dr Kakade said that the August board was prepared by the court staff and he wasn't even aware the appeal was listed since it was a 19 -year-old sine-die matter. 17 out of 35 matters were dismissed that day for non-appearance of parties based on information given by the court staff, he said. He added that a judicial error could always be corrected.

In the last week of June, this year, the NCRDC held that Dr Kakade was not the master of the roster when the matter was dismissed and the registry had failed to appraise the judge about the case against him. And it appears the dismissal was an "accidental slip," the NCRDC held.

Regarding restoration of the appeal, the order said that it was Dr Kakade's duty to correct the accidental slip and by saying in the second order that the matter should be placed before him "shows he is not guilty but exercised highest standards of professional ethics and impropriety."

Dissatisfied, the Advocates' Association through Advocate Uday Warunjikar approached the Bombay High court and sought relief on the following grounds:

• The President's report is perverse, one sided as well as the same is submitted in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. He has failed to look into other complaints against the judge.
• Original complainant was not allowed an opportunity to be heard during the disciplinary adjudication.
• Dr Kakade was allegedly on the board of a company giving free medico legal advice for a considerable amount of time even after his appointment at the SCDRC.
• The observations made in the report is contrary to the record. On the other hand, a character certificate has been given by the President to Dr Kakade.
• Dr Kakade has no powers to recall his own order under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is also not considered.
• The order was recalled after the advocates association held a meeting and was likely to pass a resolution against him.

Case Title: Consumer Courts Advocates Associates Vs. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission & Ors. 

Click Here To Read/Download Order