Interpretation of Consumer under Consumer Protection Act widen
- shrey singh
- Mar 19, 2020
- 3 min read
The Joint Labour Commissioner and Registering Officer v Kesar Lal
Civil Appeal No 2014 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP(C) No 2150 of 2020) decided 17.03.2020
Bench: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi, JJ.
Background Facts
The Parliament enacted the Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and in pursuance of the rule-making powers conferred by Sections 40 and 62, the Union Government has framed the Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998. The State of Rajasthan has also framed the Rajasthan Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules in 2009 . In pursuance of the provisions contained in Section 18, the State government constituted the Rajasthan Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board. The Welfare Board has formulated several schemes for beneficiaries registered under the Act. One of the schemes which was formulated on 1 August 2011 is for rendering financial assistance on the occasion of the marriage of a daughter of a beneficiary. The scheme envisages that financial assistance of Rs 51,000 is provided on the occasion of marriage, subject to a limit of assistance on two occasions.
The respondent obtained a Labour Beneficiary Identity Card on 29 December 2011 under the Welfare Board from the appellants after depositing the registration fee of Rs 25 and an annual contribution of Rs 60. The identity card was valid for a period of one year, from 29 December 2011 to 28 December 2012. Seeking to avail financial aid under the scheme, the respondent submitted an application on 6 November 2012 but the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Jaipur issued an order of rejection covering 327 such applications, finding technical defects as a ground for the decision.
Aggrieved by such decision, the respondent filed a case in Consumer Forum.
Question of Law
whether a construction worker who is registered under the Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 and is a beneficiary of the Scheme made under the Rules framed pursuant to the enactment, is a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986?
&
Whether a beneficiary of a statutory welfare scheme is entitled to exact accountability by invoking the remedies under the Consumer Protection Act 1986
Held
The Court held that workers under Act,1996 are consumer under Consumer Protection Act. Furthermore the Court said that as a matter of interpretation, the provisions contained in the Consumer Protection Act 1986 must be construed in a purposive manner. Parliament has provided a statutory remedy to consumers of both goods and services. Public authorities such as the appellants who have been constituted under an enactment of Parliament are entrusted with a solemn duty of providing welfare services to registered workers. The workers who are registered with the Board make contributions on the basis of which they are entitled to avail of the services provided in terms of the schemes notified by the Board. Public accountability is a significant consideration which underlies the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The evolution of jurisprudence in relation to the enactment reflects the need to ensure a sense of public accountability by allowing consumers a redressal in the context of the discharge of non-sovereign functions which are not rendered free of charge. This test is duly met in the present case.
Comments