Binty VS Union Of India

The petition has been urgently listed before the Bench by the Registry and heard via video conferencing This public interest litigation is filed against eighty respondents seeking to convert the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill 2010 into the Consumer Welfare Fund Rules 2010 It also seeks the transfer of unclaimed or unpaid amounts of unidentifiable consumers lying with the respondents to the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account, and for the refund of the same Additionally, the petition requests the disbursement of Rs 5 crores to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital and an additional donation of Rs 5 crores to Safdarjung Hospital to fight the coronavirus The prayer clause in the petition supports these requests.

The petition, listed urgently before this Bench and heard via video conferencing, is a public interest litigation involving eighty respondents. It primarily seeks to convert the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010 into the Consumer Welfare Fund Rules, 2010 and requests the transfer of unclaimed or unpaid amounts of unidentifiable consumers from various entities to the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account. Additionally, it calls for the refund of these amounts and the disbursement of Rs. 5 crores to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital, along with an additional Rs. 5 crores donation to the hospital for combating coronavirus. The petition prays for a writ of mandamus to direct the appropriate government to convert the bill into rules, a writ of prohibition, and certiorari to direct the government to transfer unclaimed consumer amounts from various financial and governmental entities into the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or 2019, in accordance with the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010.

The petition, listed before this Bench due to expressed urgency and heard via video conferencing, involves a public interest litigation against eighty respondents seeking the conversion of the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010 into the Consumer Welfare Fund Rules, 2010, and the transfer of unclaimed or unpaid amounts of unidentifiable consumers held by respondents to the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account, as well as a refund of these amounts and the disbursement of Rs. 5 crores to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital, along with an additional Rs. 5 crores donation to the hospital to combat coronavirus, and requests include issuing a writ of mandamus to direct the government to convert the Bill into Rules, a writ of prohibition and certiorari to direct the government to transfer unclaimed consumer amounts from various entities into the Consumer Welfare Fund or Suspense Account, a writ of certiorari to direct the government to refund unclaimed amounts in accordance with a Supreme Court judgment and the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010, a writ of certiorari to direct the central government to disburse Rs. 5 crores or more to senior resident doctors at Safdarjung Hospital, a writ of prohibition to direct the government to credit all public money into the Consumer Welfare Fund, a writ of mandamus to direct the government to enact the Consumer Welfare Fund Act, 2010, a writ of mandamus to direct respondents to file responses regarding the total unclaimed consumer amounts they hold, and a writ of mandamus to direct respondents to file a detailed report on unclaimed consumer amounts received under various sections of the CPA, 1986, or fines and costs directed to be deposited in the Consumer Welfare Fund established under the Central Excise Act, 1944.

The petition, presented urgently and heard via video conferencing, involves a public interest litigation against eighty respondents, primarily seeking the conversion of the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010 into the Consumer Welfare Fund Rules, 2010, the transfer of unclaimed or unpaid amounts from various respondents to the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account, and the disbursement of Rs. 5 crores each to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital and the hospital itself to combat coronavirus. The petition requests writs of mandamus, prohibition, and certiorari for the aforementioned actions, directing the government to enact relevant rules, transfer unclaimed consumer amounts, and ensure public funds are credited appropriately, as well as refund unclaimed amounts based on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Mafatlal Industries Ltd Vs. Union of India. The petitioner contends that without appropriate legislation, unclaimed consumer amounts cannot be siphoned off and emphasizes the need for legislative action by citing several constitutional articles and the preamble of the Constitution. However, the court expresses skepticism about relying solely on constitutional provisions to justify the petition’s maintainability.

The petition has been listed before this Bench by the Registry due to the urgency expressed in it and was heard via video conferencing The petitioner has filed a public interest litigation against eighty respondents, primarily seeking the conversion of the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill, 2010 into the Consumer Welfare Fund Rules, 2010, and the transfer of unclaimed or unpaid amounts of unidentifiable consumers lying with the respondents to the Consumer Welfare Fund or a Suspense Account, along with refunding the same amount and disbursing Rs. 5 crores out of it to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital Additionally, the petitioner requests an additional donation of Rs. 5 crores to Safdarjung Hospital to combat the coronavirus The prayer clause includes requests for various writs: a writ of mandamus directing the government to convert the Consumer Welfare Fund Bill into the Consumer Welfare Rules, a writ of prohibition and certiorari to transfer unclaimed consumer amounts to the CWF or a Suspense Account, a writ of certiorari for refunding unclaimed amounts as per a Supreme Court judgment, and a writ of certiorari for disbursing Rs. 5 crores to senior resident doctors of Safdarjung Hospital There are also requests for writs directing the government to credit public money into the Consumer Welfare Fund, enact the Consumer Welfare Fund Act, disclose the total unclaimed amounts lying with them, provide detailed sheets of unclaimed amounts, and prohibit transferring these amounts to other accounts until a proper statute is enacted The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Central Consumer Protection Council to donate Rs. 5 crores to Safdarjung Hospital to fight COVID-19 and any other order the Court deems fit The petitioner argues that respondents cannot take unclaimed or unrefunded money from unidentifiable customers due to a lack of enactment, citing the Supreme Court judgment in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and other vital Articles of the Constitution The petitioner believes that the legislative void highlighted in the petition justifies accepting it and emphasizes the importance of the issue by referencing the Constitution’s preamble However, the Court feels that relying on the Constitution alone does not justify the petition’s maintainability and states that a writ petition is not the correct remedy for addressing the petitioner’s grievances The Court asserts it cannot assume the role of the Legislature to convert a proposed Bill into Law and that it is for the Parliament or Executive to decide how such amounts are utilized, as the respondents are not acting contrary to any statutory mandate It is a settled law that the Constitution does not allow courts to direct or advise the executive on policy matters, which lie within the Legislature or Executive’s sphere The Court can enforce a law but cannot create one or a policy and seek to enforce it The Court references cases supporting this view: Suresh Seth v. Commr., Indore Municipal Corpn., Asif Hameed v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, and Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass The Court concludes that the present writ petition is untenable because the petitioner has failed to understand the separation of powers under the Indian Constitution, and it is not for the courts to legislate, convert bills into rules, or disburse amounts to hospitals, regardless of the genuineness of the cause Additionally, the judgment in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. does not apply to this case, as it pertains only to certain categories of refunds, which are not relevant to the petitioner’s case.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit;

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: