The Supreme Court this week passed several directions for “systemic overhaul” so that the Consumer Protection Act does not become a “dead letter”.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice TS Thakur observed that the “poor state” of the consumer courts was mainly due to gross inadequate infrastructure, poor organisational set-up, absence of adequate and trained manpower and lack of qualified members in the adjudicating bodies.
Referring to an interim report submitted by an apex court-constituted committee, headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Arijit Pasayat, the bench noted that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and consumer courts in various States, including Delhi, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Jammu and Kashmir, were not functioning effectively as expected.
“The interim report of committee provides an unfortunate reflection of the state of affairs in the consumer fora at the district, state and national level. That these bodies which are vested with important functions of a judicial nature continue to work despite the prevalence of such adverse conditions and in the face of the apathy of the governments both at national and state level is a matter which requires immediate intervention by this court,” the bench, also comprising justices DY Chandrachud and LN Rao, said.
“A systemic overhaul of the entire infrastructure is necessary if the Consumer Protection Act is not to become a dead letter. With the proliferation of goods and services in a rapidly growing economy, Parliament envisaged the enactment to be the cornerstone of a vibrant consumer movement. Reality has been distant from the aspirations of the law,” it said.
It passed a slew of directions and asked the Centre to frame within four months model rules for adoption by the State governments and submit it before the apex court for approval.
“The Union Government shall also frame within four months model rules prescribing objective norms for implementing the provisions of section 10(1)(b), section 16(1)(b) and section 20(1)(b) in regard to the appointment of members respectively of the District fora, State Commissions and National Commission,” it said.
The bench said, “The model rules shall provide for the payment of salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of the members of the consumer fora commensurate with the nature of adjudicatory duties and the need to attract suitable talent to the adjudicating bodies. These rules shall be finalised upon due consultation with the President of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, within the period stipulated above.”
The bench has fixed the matter for March 7 next year for further directions and for reporting compliance of its order.
While noting the reasons for the poor state of affairs at the consumer courts, the bench said, “Benches of the State and district fora sit, in many cases, for barely two or three hours every day and remain non-functional for months due to a lack of quorum. Orders are not enforced like other orders passed by the civil courts.”
It noted that state governments have failed to respond to the suggestions of the committee for streamlining the state of affairs and quality of the presiding members, especially of non-judicial members at state and district levels is “poor”.
The bench also proposed that members of the NCDRC should get the same salaries, allowances and conditions of services as are available to the sitting judges of the high courts.
The apex court directed Tamil Nadu and Jammu and Kashmir to appoint the president and members of the state consumer commission at the earliest.
It also asked the state governments to implement the recommendations of the committee within a period of three months.