Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on Thursday expressed concern over the mounting backlog of cases in consumer commissions across the country, observing that prolonged delays have defeated the very purpose for which these forums were created.
NEW DELHI — Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on Thursday expressed concern over the mounting backlog of cases in consumer commissions across the country, observing that prolonged delays have defeated the very purpose for which these forums were created.
Hearing a matter related to the functioning of consumer dispute redressal bodies, the CJI questioned the efficiency of consumer commissions after taking note of a media report highlighting a case that had remained pending since 2019 and was listed only once in 2022, with no hearing thereafter.
“We saw a news article stating that a case pending since 2019 was listed only once in 2022, and there has been no hearing since. Is this how consumer commissions function? What is the point of having such special commissions?” the CJI remarked.
Stressing that consumer forums were established to provide speedy and affordable justice, Chief Justice Kant said the objective stood defeated if cases continued to languish for years.
“We keep talking about infrastructure and benefits, yet this is how they are functioning?” he observed.
Taking a stern view of the situation, the Supreme Court sought a comprehensive report from the President of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on the functioning of consumer fora in the country.
The report must include details of pending cases, existing vacancies, disposal rates of individual benches, and whether there is a need to increase the number of commissions to handle the workload.
The apex court directed the NCDRC Chairman to submit the report within two weeks.
The Bench also asked State Consumer Commissions and State Consumer Affairs Departments to furnish detailed data on pendency, including year-wise breakups of pending matters, to enable the court to assess the extent of the backlog and identify systemic bottlenecks.
The Supreme Court emphasised that both the Centre and state governments would have to prioritise filling vacancies and strengthening the institutional capacity of consumer commissions if the growing backlog was to be addressed effectively.