(1) Every proceeding before the District Commission shall be conducted by the President of that Commission and atleast one member thereof, sitting together:
Provided that where a member, for any reason, is unable to conduct a proceeding till it is completed, the President and the other member shall continue the proceeding from the stage at which it was last heard by the previous member.
(2) On receipt of a complaint made under section 35, the District Commission may, by order, admit the complaint for being proceeded with or reject the same:
Provided that a complaint shall not be rejected under this section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the complainant:
Provided further that the admissibility of the complaint shall ordinarily be decided within twenty-one days from the date on which the complaint was filed.
(3) Where the District Commission does not decide the issue of admissibility of the complaint within the period so specified, it shall be deemed to have been admitted.
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 36
Section 36 governs the conduct of proceedings and the admission of complaints before the District Commission. It establishes a mandatory minimum quorum of the President and at least one member sitting together, regulates the admission or rejection of complaints, guarantees a mandatory prior hearing before rejection, and introduces a revolutionary statutory deemed admission mechanism if admissibility is not decided within twenty-one days.
Track the 21-day period from the date of filing meticulously. If the District Commission fails to pass an order on admissibility within 21 days, file a formal memo placing on record that the complaint is deemed admitted under Section 36(3). Demand immediate issuance of notice and copy of complaint to the opposite party under Section 38(1). If the Commission attempts to reject a complaint without granting an oral hearing, challenge the rejection order as void ab initio for violating Section 36(2) first proviso.