<p>Unfilled vacancies in commissions constituted for redress of consumer grievances – both at the state and district levels – continue to dilute the spirit of India’s Consumer Protection Act. </p><p>According to reports, 18 out of 36 state-level commissions do not have presidents, and 62 members’ positions are vacant. </p><p>Of the 685 district-level commissions, 218 do not have presidents; the number of member vacancies is 518. Karnataka has reported many vacancies; the government has claimed that the process of filling them is underway. </p><p>Earlier this year, the Karnataka High Court told the state government to expeditiously fill the vacancies and closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) based on an assurance from the government. </p><p>These vacancies have severely hindered the functioning of the commissions, just as unfilled positions in information commissions have affected the delivery of justice under the Right To Information (RTI).</p>.<p>The Consumer Protection Act envisages and proposes speedy and effective redress of grievances, with the help of technology through real-time tracking of cases, virtual hearings, filing e-record management, etc. With digital payment avenues facilitating a surge in the gig economy and e-commerce, there is an urgent need to adopt new legal tools to handle complaints of a new nature, covering new forms of service lapses. </p><p>The online marketplace has spread across sectors in the country: from consumer goods and services to food and travel to health and education, giving rise to thousands of complaints about the deficiency in services on the part of the providers. These have to be addressed under the provisions of the Act. Timely redress for the complainants will hinge on commissions that operate with the requisite strength.</p>.<p>It is to be noted that a parliamentary standing committee on consumer affairs, food, and public distribution found the online grievance redress platform – e-daakhil – as having resolved only 23% of the registered complaints. In its report, the committee also noted that the relevant ministry had not provided substantial information on measures taken to address shortcomings highlighted in earlier instances. That the committee’s original recommendation for setting up a monitoring mechanism to ensure transparency was not acted upon exposes systemic bottlenecks. When commissions are unable to function due to a lack of personnel and digital redress platforms fail to plug the gaps, it signifies an erosion of the idea of consumer protection. The Central and state governments must prioritise the resolution of these issues to bolster the redress mechanism and restore public trust in the system.</p>
<p>Unfilled vacancies in commissions constituted for redress of consumer grievances – both at the state and district levels – continue to dilute the spirit of India’s Consumer Protection Act. </p><p>According to reports, 18 out of 36 state-level commissions do not have presidents, and 62 members’ positions are vacant. </p><p>Of the 685 district-level commissions, 218 do not have presidents; the number of member vacancies is 518. Karnataka has reported many vacancies; the government has claimed that the process of filling them is underway. </p><p>Earlier this year, the Karnataka High Court told the state government to expeditiously fill the vacancies and closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) based on an assurance from the government. </p><p>These vacancies have severely hindered the functioning of the commissions, just as unfilled positions in information commissions have affected the delivery of justice under the Right To Information (RTI).</p>.<p>The Consumer Protection Act envisages and proposes speedy and effective redress of grievances, with the help of technology through real-time tracking of cases, virtual hearings, filing e-record management, etc. With digital payment avenues facilitating a surge in the gig economy and e-commerce, there is an urgent need to adopt new legal tools to handle complaints of a new nature, covering new forms of service lapses. </p><p>The online marketplace has spread across sectors in the country: from consumer goods and services to food and travel to health and education, giving rise to thousands of complaints about the deficiency in services on the part of the providers. These have to be addressed under the provisions of the Act. Timely redress for the complainants will hinge on commissions that operate with the requisite strength.</p>.<p>It is to be noted that a parliamentary standing committee on consumer affairs, food, and public distribution found the online grievance redress platform – e-daakhil – as having resolved only 23% of the registered complaints. In its report, the committee also noted that the relevant ministry had not provided substantial information on measures taken to address shortcomings highlighted in earlier instances. That the committee’s original recommendation for setting up a monitoring mechanism to ensure transparency was not acted upon exposes systemic bottlenecks. When commissions are unable to function due to a lack of personnel and digital redress platforms fail to plug the gaps, it signifies an erosion of the idea of consumer protection. The Central and state governments must prioritise the resolution of these issues to bolster the redress mechanism and restore public trust in the system.</p>
