(1.) AS in all the petitions, common questions arise for consideration and to some extent, the facts are inter-linked, they are being considered by this common judgement.
(2.) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 9023 of 2007 has been preferred by Ms. Heena N. Thacker, who was appointed as a Member of the District Consumer Redressal Forum for Kutch District under the Consumer Protection Act read with Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the "act" and the "rules" for the sake of convenience ). It is the case of the petitioner that she underwent the training programme in capacity as the Member of the Consumer Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as the "consumer Forum" for the sake of convenience) and she discharged the duty satisfactorily from 2001-2006. On 27. 9. 2005, as the term of the petitioner was to expire on 14. 3. 2006, she applied for reappointment as per proviso added to Sub-section (2) of Section 10. The application of the petitioner was forwarded, however, the extension was not granted to the petitioner. On 8. 8. 2006, as advertisement was published for inviting applications of the eligible persons for appointment as the Member of the District Forum, the petitioner in response thereto, submitted application. The interviews were held and ultimately, as per the petitioner, she was selected and her name appeared at Sr. No. 1 in the names recommended by the selection committee constituted as per the Act. However, the petitioner was not given appointment, but respondent No. 3, another candidate whose name was also included in the select list, but latter to the petitioner, was given appointment. It is under these circumstances, the said petitioner has approached this Court seeking directions to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as full-time lady Member of the District Forum for a term of five years and it is also prayed in the petition by the concerned petitioner to cancel the appointment made of the person other than the petitioner as the lady Member in the District Forum.
(3.) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 19512 of 2007 is preferred by Ms. Harshaben Shantilal Chauhan, who was also initially appointed in the year 2001 vide order dated 2. 7. 2001 as the Member in Ahmedabad District Consumer Redressal Forum for a period of five years. On 6. 2. 2006, the application was made by the petitioner for reappointment and as per the petitioner, her reappointment was recommended by the selection committee, but the reappointment was granted for a period of one year vide order dated 12. 5. 2006. It is the case of the petitioner that vide letter dated 2. 1. 2007, she requested for the reappointment for a further period of four years. It is her case that her name was also recommended being deserving candidate for reappointment, but the State Government, instead of extending the period of extending the period of appointment for a further period of four years, issued advertisement on 27. 7. 2007 in the newspaper inviting the applications for the post of Member in the District Forum. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court by preferring the present petition to seek for appropriate directions to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Member of District Forum. It deserves to be recorded that pending the petition, the petitioner has brought about the amendment, seeking alternative prayer to direct the respondents to extend the period of appointment for a further period of four years based on the earlier appointment for a period of one year. The petitioner has also challenged the resolution of the State Government dated 30. 11. 2004 by amendment contending, inter alia, that the said resolution is ultra vires the powers of the State Government for laying down the manner and mode of appointment of the Member in the District Forum, which otherwise is controlled by the Section 10 (2) read with Section 30 of the Act.