Supreme Court on Poor State of Affairs Prevalent in Consumer Bodies in India

 

INTRODUCTION

 

On today’s show, we will discuss the case of In Re: Inaction of the Governments in Appointing President and Members/Staff of Districts and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Inadequate Infrastructure Across India v. Union of India and Others, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 602, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed the state of affairs prevalent in the Consumer Forums across the country due to existing vacancies for the post of President and Members that have not been fulfilled since last many years.

 

Let us discuss the pertinent observations and directions by the Supreme Court in this regard.

 

OBSERVATIONS BY THE COURT

 

Firstly, it was observed that the legislative intent of empowering the consumers is visible through the enactment of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and thereafter through the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Secondly, the Court noted that heavy backlog exists in fulfilling the existing vacancies in the Consumer Forums and State Consumer Commissions across the country.

 

Thirdly, the Court directed the states that have not notified the new rules under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for salaries, allowances and other terms & conditions of service of the President and Members of the State Commission, to notify such rules within two weeks.

 

Fourthly, the Court also directed that in case the concerned states fail to notify such rules under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Model Rules of 2020 framed by the Government of India in this regard shall “automatically kick off and apply” to such states.

 

Fifthly, the Court also noted that many states have not yet set up the Selection Committee in terms of Rule 6 (1) of the Consumer Protection (Qualification for appointment, method of recruitment, procedure of appointment, term of office, resignation and removal of the President and members of the State Commission and District Commission) Rules, 2020. Thus, such states were directed to constitute the Selection Committee within four weeks.

 

Sixthly, the Court further directed that all the vacancies for the post of President or Members should be filled within a period of eight weeks.

 

Seventhly, the electronic infrastructure supporting the Consumer Commissions and Forums was discussed. Such network is titled as “Computerization and Computer Networking of Consumer Commissions” (CONFONET) and is being fully funded by the Central Government. The Court directed the States to apprise itself regarding the manner in which CONFONET is being utilized.

 

And lastly, the Court also observed that there is a need for a comprehensive Legislative Impact Study regarding the new Consumer Protection Act of 2019, and that such study should be completed within four weeks.

 

Those were the observations by the Court. So, what are my concluding remarks?

 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

 

As a practising Advocate, I can say that the state of affairs prevalent in the Consumer Forums across the country is quite abysmal. The Hon’ble Supreme Court quite rightly noted that there is little endeavour on part of the states to translate the legislative intent of empowering consumers into an administrative infrastructure with requisite facilities. A healthy and robust consumer disputes redressal mechanism is quintessential for smooth functioning of any economy. Total disregard in making appointments to the Consumer Forums and Commissions has translated into undue delay in disposal of consumer complaints and redressal of consumer grievances. I hope that the directions given by the Supreme Court in this case are implemented in letter and spirit by the states and union territories within the stipulated time frame.