Evaluation Report

on

Impact and Effectiveness

of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Executive Summary

Project Directors
Prof. Suresh Misra
Dr. Sapna Chadah
Dr. Mamta Pathania

Project Team

Dr. Amit Kr. Singh

Shri Virendra Nath Mishra
Shri Pankaj Kr. Singh
Shri Ashutosh Dixit
Dr. Yatish Mishra

Sponsored by Conducted by

Department of Consumer Affairs Centre for Consumer Studies

Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food Indian Institute of Public
and Public Distribution Administration
Government of India New Delhi
 CONTENTS

Preface i

Acknowledgements ii

Executive Summary 1-22

1. Background 1

2. Objectives of the Study 3

3. Methodology 3

4. Sampling Techniques 4

5. Sample Size 5

6. Time Frame 6

7. Limitations of the Study 6

Findings and Recommendations 6-22

8. Major Observations 6

9. Major Findings 8

10. Recommendations 17
 PREFACE

The Consumer Protection Act was enacted in 1986 for better protection of the
consumers. The Act provides for the redressal of grievances and also the relief that the
consumers are entitled to, apart from setting up councils to promote consumer welfare. The
Act has been in operation for the last twenty five years and it was expected to provide relief
to consumers and give a boost to the consumer movement in the country.

An assessment of the working of the Act reveals a number of loopholes in its

implementation. Even though the redressal mechanism has been established yet the justice
delivery mechanism has not been able to provide relief to the much exploited consumers.
Large numbers of complaints are pending in the three tier mechanism and the pendency is
only growing. The complaints are not redressed within the stipulated time as a result the
consumers are not approaching the forums to file complaints. Moreover, the capacity of the
forums to deliver justice itself needs to be upgraded. Another major reason relates to the
level of consumer awareness in the country about the existence of such legislation. As a
result consumers are unaware of their rights. Perhaps this is one of the major drawbacks.

After twenty five years of the Act being in operation, it is time to evaluate and assess
its impact and effectiveness. The Department of Consumer Affairs, GoI has initiated this
study on “Evaluation of the Impact and Effectiveness of Consumer Protection Act, 1986”.
The Study has been entrusted to the Centre for Consumer Studies, Indian Institute of Public
Administration, New Delhi. The Study covered 5 states 10 districts and 50 villages. To widen
the scope of the study and also to get a true perspective more than 310 District Forums and
60 villages were covered. Apart from this large number of consumers from cross section of
the society as well as complainants formed the bulk of the sample size.

The Report presents a detailed analysis of the state of consumer protection and the
effectiveness of the Consumer Protection Act. Various parameters have been used to get a
clear picture of the existing ground realities and what ails the consumer movement in the
country. It also presents a detailed analysis of the role of various stakeholders in promoting
consumer welfare and the lacuna that exists in the policy and practice which needs to be
filled up. We are confident that the analysis, findings and the recommendations of the study
will go a long way in reframing consumer policies, programmes and strategies to provide
better protection to the consumers and take the consumer movement forward.

We will be happy to receive valuable comments about the report.

New Delhi
14.1.2013
Prof. Suresh Misra
Dr. Sapna Chadah
Dr. Mamta Pathania
Project Directors, IIPA

i
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are thankful to the Department of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Consumer

Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Government of India for sponsoring this study and
providing all necessary support while the study was being conducted in various states. We
are grateful to Shri. Pankaj Agrawala, Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Shri
Manoj Kumar Parida, Joint Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs and other Officers for
the support they extended to us during the study. We would also like to place on record our
thanks to Shri Rajiv Agarwal, Former Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs for his
support and advice during the initial stages of the study.

We are also indebted to various State Governments, Officers and Officials of the
Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Departments for their support. The Presidents
and Members of various SCDRCs and the District Forums and other officials of the redressal
agencies were very helpful and provided all the relevant data that was required to complete
the study. The Registrar, Joint Registrar, Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar of the
NCDRC were very helpful and provided all the required information to us. We are thankful to
all of them, but for their cooperation it would have been difficult to complete the study.

We have no words to express our gratitude to various institutions, organisations,

consumer activist, consumer experts, legal experts and the consumers of the five states who
helped us and provided support in various forms to complete the study. But for their help and
support the study would have not seen the light of the day.

Apart from the field data, data, information, literature and useful material has been
collected from various sources, we are thankful to all of them for their help.

We would also like to place on record our thanks to Director, IIPA and other officers
for their support in completing the study. We will be failing in our duty if we do not
acknowledge the support extended by the Research Officers of the Centre for Consumer
Studies, IIPA namely Dr. Amit Kr.Singh, Shri Virendra Nath Mishra, Shri Pankaj Kumar
Singh, Shri Ashutosh Kumar Dixit and Dr. Yatish Mishra in completing the field work in time
inspite of various problems in the field. We are also thankful to Shri Sandeep Kumar
(Research Officer) and Ms. Kalyani Mishra and Shri Kapil Nagar (Field Investigators) for
their help in collecting and compiling the data. We would like to thank Shri R.C.Mangla,
Consultant, CCS for providing excellent administrative and financial support during the
study. We are also thankful to Ms. Deepa, Ms. Hema and Mr. Anand Singh, for providing
secretarial assistance and to Mr. Anoop and Mr. Dhara Ballabh Joshi for providing logistic
support.

Project Directors

ii
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Background

Confident, informed and empowered consumers are the backbone of a vibrant

economy. The business of any manufacturer, service provider, trader or retailer depends on
and flourishes with consumers‟ demand. In fact, business starts with consumer and ends
with consumer satisfaction. Inspite of this, consumers are a vulnerable lot and are being
exploited in various forms like overcharging, black-marketing, adulteration, short weights and
measures, misleading advertisements, poor quality of services, dubious sale purchase
agreements and other deceptive practices. In a country like India, where a substantial
number of the people are living below the poverty line, having high level of unemployment
and poor literacy level; most of them do not have adequate information about goods and
services they are using. They are exposed to unfair, unethical market practices of some
dishonest businesses. A combination of new technologies and globalization of the world
economy has further aggravated the problem. The revolution in electronic media in 21st
century along with globalisation and liberalisation has transformed market practices. It has
led to vast expansion of business with a variety of goods and services to cater to the needs
of the consumers which have left the consumers further confused and bewildered. In such a
scenario consumer protection is a socio- economic programme to be pursued by the
government as well as the business as the satisfaction of the consumers is in the interest of
both. In this context, the government, however, has a primary responsibility to protect the
consumers‟ interests and rights through appropriate policy measures, legal structures and
administrative framework.

Consumer protection ensures that consumers receive information that will allow them
to make informed decisions and are not subject to unfair and deceptive practices, have
access to recourse mechanisms to resolve disputes when transactions go awry, and are
able to maintain privacy of their personal information. At its heart, the need for consumer
protection arises from an imbalance of power, information and resources between
consumers and their service providers, placing consumers at a disadvantage. Consumer
protection aims to address these market failures and imbalances. In fact, Government of
India has enacted different legislations to safeguard consumers‟ interests from time to time.
However, except for the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969, all
the other Acts were mainly punitive and preventive in nature. Inspite of these Acts the
1
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
consumers did not have an effective mechanism or institutional arrangement for speedy and
inexpensive redressal of their grievances. Moreover, lack of an effective popular consumer
movement isolated the consumer and his plight only increased. Hence recognizing the need
for equipping a consumer, to be vigilant and empowered with respect to his rights, the Indian
Parliament enacted the Consumer Protection Act in 1986.

The Consumer Protection Act is a very unique and highly progressive piece of social
welfare legislation and the provisions are intended to provide effective and efficient
safeguards to the consumers against various forms of exploitations and unfair dealings. It is
a handy weapon for consumers to ensure accountability of producers of goods and providers
of services. It provides for setting up a three tier redressal mechanism and disposal of
complaints in a time frame. However, the success of the consumer movement depends upon
the level of awareness among the consumers at large about their rights and remedies
available to them and also the effectiveness of the redress mechanism in providing quick
and inexpensive justice to the consumers. The law can only give certain rights to the
consumers, but its functioning and implementation largely depends on the awareness and
efforts of the consumers and other stakeholders.

The Act has been in operation for the last 25 years, but there are deficiencies and
shortcoming in respect of its effective implementation and operation. The purpose of the
three tier quasi-judicial structure was to give quick and inexpensive justice to the consumers;
however, the machinery is riddled with many problems making it difficult for the complainant
to get justice in the prescribed time. The problem is further aggravated by the low level of
awareness among the consumers. Even after 25 years of the consumer movement,
concerns are being raised regarding the level of awareness of the consumers‟ inspite of
many steps taken at the central and state government level to generate awareness among
the masses. It‟s time to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the Consumer Protection
Act and take remedial measure aimed at strengthening the consumer movement.

Therefore, on the request of the Department of Consumer Affairs, GoI, the Centre for
Consumer Studies, Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi conducted an
Evaluation study on “Impact and Effectiveness of Consumer Protection Act, 1986” to suggest
policy guidelines to make the Act effective and beneficial to the consumers. The present
study has been conducted in five states of India which are located in five different regions of
India, i.e. Gujarat, Karnataka, Odisha, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh. The important features of
the study are as follows:
2
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
2. Objectives of the Study

In view of the above, the objectives of the study were: -

 To assess the level of awareness among the consumers regarding their rights
and remedies available to them under the CPA;

 To analyse and evaluate the working of the quasi-judicial machinery under the
Act;

 To assess the effectiveness of the CP Act in redressal of consumer grievances;

 To study the functioning of the consumer councils established at the central, state
and district levels; and

 To suggest appropriate measures to make the machinery under the Act more
effective and efficient to achieve the purpose of the Act.

3. Methodology

The present study is an empirical research based on both primary and secondary
data. It is a blend of both descriptive and analytical methods of study. For the purpose of the
study primary data was collected through a set of questionnaires and by way of discussions
with various stakeholders. Search conferences have also been organized to get information.
The approach was to seek information from various stakeholders involved in the protection
of consumer rights. The secondary data comprising of records of the DFs, SCDRCs,
NCDRC, Department of Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Affairs in various states, various
published and unpublished reports, books, articles, and journals etc. have also been used
for the purpose of the study.

To assess the impact and the level of awareness of the consumers regarding the
consumer rights and other aspects related to consumer protection a questionnaire was
administered to the consumers. The information regarding level of awareness about the CP
Act and its provisions has been gathered through primary surveys. To study the
effectiveness of the CP Act and the working of the Dispute Redressal Machinery at the three
levels, two set of questionnaires was prepared - one for the Presidents and Members of the
National Commission, State Commissions and District Forums and another for the
Complainant / appellant. Discussions were also held with the Presidents and the Members
of the Consumer Forums/ Commissions to gather their views on the working of the Forums/
Commissions. To study the functioning of the Consumer Councils at State as well as District

3
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
level, CCS research team held discussion with the Secretary and Director of Food, Civil
Supply and Consumer Welfare Department of the selective States and also with the District
Collector/Magistrate, SDM and District Civil Supply Officers of the selected Districts.
Discussions have also been held with state and district level officials to evaluate the role of
the State Government in making the CP Act more effective.

4. Sampling Techniques

The survey methodology for this study was stratified random sampling. Since India is
a very heterogeneous country and having diverse geographic, socio – cultural and economic
characteristic, a stratified random sampling could reflect the characteristics of the population
as a whole. Firstly, five states from six mentioned regions (as per ToR of this project) of India
were selected for the study. These states were selected in a way that they can best
represent the entire geographical regions of the country. The states were: Uttar Pradesh
from North, Gujarat from West, Karnataka from South, Odisha from Central Region and
Tripura from North East. From each state two districts were selected. Selection of Districts
was mainly based upon the ratio of two variables - size of the population and the number of
case filed in the respective DCDRF of that particular district.

Subsequently, within the states all the districts were ranked accordingly with their
ratio value. After that one district with higher value and one district with lower value were
selected for the study. While selecting the districts care was taken that these districts should
not be adjoining and they must represent the tribal, mountainous and coastal regions of India
as per the guidelines of the Department of Consumer Affairs.

After selecting the districts further stratification was made on the basis of rural and
urban areas to address the fact that there is wide distribution of population in India. Still 70
percent of country‟s population is living in rural areas and 30 percent in urban areas. Hence
to get the opinion of both rural and urban consumers; six villages spreading across the three
Developmental Block/Taluk and three colonies of the District town were selected in the
study. As far as Blocks/Taluks are concerned the selection criteria was as follows; (i)
Block/Taluk with higher literacy level, (ii) Block/Taluk with lower literacy level, and (iii)
Block/Taluk with high concentration of SC/ST population. The selection of two villages from
each Block/Taluk and the respondents therein was done randomly.

4
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 The study tried to get the opinion of all the stakeholders involved in the consumer
protection movement in India such as consumers, complainants, redressal agencies,
VCOs/NGOs, legal experts, policy-making institutions, government officials, departments,
social activists and others. Since their role, responsibilities and interests are different;
therefore, this study adopted various methods for data collection. They were as follows:

1. Interview Schedule – Different structured questionnaires were developed for in-

depth interview of the consumer, complainants/appellants, Presidents/Members of
the Forums and Commissions. The questionnaires were subjected to reliability test
by pre-testing the constructed tools by administering it to 10 % of the respondents in
each category. The questionnaires were modified based on the responses received.

2. Focus Group Discussion- FGDs were organized with the NGOs/VCOs and
Panchayat Level Officials to get their opinion.

3. Formal Meetings- Meeting with Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer
Affairs in various states as well as officials at District level who are looking after the
implementation of CP Act.

5. Sample Size

The sample size consists of 10 districts from 5 states (two from each state). From
each district 200 person from different sections of the society and 25 complainants from the
respective DCDRF were selected (total sample size of 2000 consumers and 175
complainants). Apart from these 10 District Forums, 5 State Commissions and National
Commission have also been taken up for the study. For the purpose of study we proposed to
interview 30 members from 10 District Forums, 15 members from 5 SCDRCs and 10
members of NCDRC, but to have a broader perspective, Questionnaire was administered to
all the District Forums of the five selected states inviting their views and suggestions on the
working of the quasi-judicial machinery. Out of total 162 District Forums in the five states we
received responses from 112 Presidents and 193 Members of the District Forums, which
covers 70 percent of the study area. Their opinions have been incorporated in this report.
Apart from this the CCS research team also organised Search Conferences at district level.
One Validation Seminar was also organised after the presentation of the report to
Department to get suggestions and to validate the findings. The study was completed in six
months.

5
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
6. Time Frame
Table 4
Phases Work Plan Months
I Preliminary Work (Manpower Planning identification of 1
Respondents & Developing Interview Schedule)
II Collection of Primary and Secondary Data and Search 2
Conferences
III Data Compilation & Analysis 1
IV Draft Report and Validation Seminar 1
V Final Report 1

7. Limitations of the Study

1. The study began with the presumption that basic data of the NCDRC, SCDRCs
and District Forums would be available through the CONFONET project,
NCDRC, and DCA but not much was available and therefore, data had to be
generated. Record compilation and management is poor.
2. There was limited cooperation from some of the organisations in terms of
providing data, reports, literature and information about consumer activities.
3. The complainants and the lawyers were not very cooperative during the survey.
4. June and July happens to be vacation period for NCDRC and SCDRC and
therefore, time taken to collect data was more than anticipated.
5. The Presidents and Members of the redressal agencies were hesitant to frankly
give their views/opinions about the working of the three tier redressal mechanism.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8. Major Observations

1. The study reveals that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 had limited impact on
consumer empowerment mainly due to lack of awareness about the Act and its
provisions. Comparatively the impact has been more on males than females. The
urban consumers are much more aware about the Act than their rural
counterparts. It is also evident that higher the age group more the awareness
about the Act and its provisions. Similarly higher the education level and income
level more the awareness about the Act.
2. The Act has much less impact on the marginalised sections of the society who
lack education and are living in the rural areas with low level of income.
3. The awareness level about the Consumer Protection Act and Consumer Rights is
higher in areas where consumer clubs have been set up in schools and colleges
and are actively involved in consumer activities.
4. The limited impact and the ineffectiveness of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
to a large extent is not due to inadequacy of the law or its provisions but it is due
to the poor implementation of the Act and the apathy of the governments and
other stakeholders including the consumers.

6
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 5. The effectiveness of the Consumer Protection Act is marginal as far as redressal
of consumer complaints is concerned. The District Forums to a very large extent
are not able to deliver justice quickly and in a cost effective manner as envisaged
under the Act and therefore, consumers are losing faith in the redressal
mechanism at the District level. Moreover, the compensation awarded is so small
that there is apathy among the consumers to file complaints in the district forums
as the time and cost factor does not favour the consumer. Timely complaint
redressal is the key to success of the CP Act.
6. There is a broad consensus among the various stakeholders that the delay in
disposal of cases is largely due to the involvement and appearance of lawyers in
all cases. Because of this the proceedings have become too technical,
cumbersome, and expensive as slowly the procedures of the civil court have
crept in the proceedings of the District Forums.
7. The District Forums to a large extent lack the capacity to deliver speedy justice
due to lack of adequate infrastructure, poor management of records, shortage of
manpower and the required skill and knowledge of the members manning the
District Forums.
8. The delay in filling up of the vacancies at all the three levels of the redressal
mechanism has further added to the problem leading to large pendency of
complaints.
9. Computerization of the redressal agencies/mechanism should have helped in
better management of data and thereby bringing greater efficiency in the working
of the redressal agencies. The impact of computerization has been lacklustre due
to lack of computer skills among the members of the redressal agencies,
shortage of technical manpower and consumer peripherals, inadequate
bandwidth leading to poor internet connectivity and also irregular power supply.
This has led to delay in disposal of complaints and the Consumer Protection Act
has not been very effective in protecting consumer interests in the country.
10. Consumer welfare does not seem to be a priority area for the State Governments
as there is no separate Department of Consumer Affairs in the states and it has
been merged with Food and Civil Supplies Department. As a result of this the line
department dealing exclusively with consumer affairs down to the village level
does not exist. The Civil Supplies officers are too over worked with PDS.
11. No specific policies/ strategies have been framed by the state governments on
consumer protection. No serious and meaningful effort is made by the state
governments to educate the consumers. Enormous delay takes place in filling up
the vacancies in the District Forums/State Commissions and also in providing
infrastructure. State governments mainly depend on the grants from the central
government. In a federal polity unless the state governments give importance to
consumer welfare, not much can be achieved.
12. The Consumer Protection Councils at the District and the State level have largely
not been constituted. Even where they have been constituted after a long delay,
they have remained dysfunctional and purposeless and the meetings are just a
formality and a ritual without any worthwhile agenda.
13. The Central Government has to play a much more proactive role as far as
consumer welfare is concerned. In the present scenario central allocation to
states and various other organizations has to be increased with timely release of
funds to sustain the programmes. Specific programmes have limited impact. At

7
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 present there are no specific long term policies to strengthen the consumer
movement. There is a need to reorient policies and strategies to make them
much more effective.
14. The VCOs are major stakeholders in the consumer movement but they lack both
capacity and credibility. The consumers to a large extent do not have faith in
these organisations. In each State there are hundreds of such VCOs claiming to
be representing consumer‟s interest. However, only a handful of these have
emerged as competent professional bodies working for consumer welfare.
15. There is no incentive for VCOs to take up consumer complaints; therefore, very
few cases are being filed by the VCOs on behalf of the consumers. Moreover, the
compensation awarded to the consumers is so small that consumers are not
encouraged to file cases. The time and cost factor dissuades the consumers from
approaching the forums for redressal of their complaints.

9. Major Findings

Impact of Consumer Protection Act

1. The sample size of the consumer respondents is 2100 spread across ten districts in
five states of U.P, Odisha, Karnataka, Gujarat and Tripura, 73.6 percent are males
and 26.4 percent are female respondents. 35 percent of the consumers are less than
30 years of age, 26.1 percent are in the age group of 30-40 years, 20.5 percent
between 40-50 years of age and 18.4 percent of the respondents are above 50 years
of age.

2. 29.7 percent are associated with agriculture, 18.8 percent are traders/
manufacturers/ small businessmen, 15.8 percent are students, 12.7 percent are
housewives and 11.5 percent are teachers. 60.2 percent of the respondents had an
annual income of less than ` 50,000, 14.8 percent between ` 50,000- 1 lakh, 12.1
percent had income between ` 1-2 lakh, 10.2 percent of them had an annual income
between ` 2-5 lakh and 2.3 percent were in above 5 lakh annual income category.

3. Only 25.2 percent of the consumers always enquire about the terms and conditions
before making a purchase, 40.3 percent do it sometimes. 26.9 percent always
enquire about the available choices, 31.8 percent always enquire about the contents
of the product. However, 57.1 percent of the respondents always enquire about the
price and 50.8 percent always see the expiry date.

4. Only 26.0 percent of the respondents always insist on the cash memo/ bill after
making a purchase. 41.9 percent ask for it sometimes and 32.1 percent never ask for
the purchase memo/ bill.

5. 70.6 percent of the respondents are aware about the MRP and 48.0 percent know
that one can bargain on MRP and get the product for a lesser value.

6. 70.5 percent of the consumer respondents know about ISI mark, 41.3 percent are
aware about AGMARK, 47.2 percent know Hallmark, only 16.0 percent can
recognise FPO mark, 9.6 percent know about BEE logo, 7.1 percent about Eco-

8
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 mark, 32 percent know about ISO and 39.7 percent know about Veg. /Non Veg.
marking.

7. Consumers are exploited in various forms in the market. 55.4 percent of the
respondents have experienced adulteration, 47.4 percent short weighing, 50.1
percent have been victim of overcharging, 43.4 percent had received poor quality
product, 35.3 percent had deficiency in services, 41.2 percent had an experience of
defective goods and 36.8 percent of the respondents are victims of false information.

8. Out of those who had experienced some form of exploitation 43.7 percent of them
ignored the problem and took no action, 41.7 percent tried to get the price/return the
product or replace the product. Only 17.3 percent mobilised other consumers. 96
percent did not lodge a complaint in the District Forum and only 4 percent made a
complaint to the dealer/manufacturer.

9. The awareness level about CP Act is low. 67.2 percent of the respondents do not
know about the Consumer Protection Act. Only 10.2 percent know about it to a large
extent and 22.6 percent to some extent.

10. 63.5 percent of the male and 71.0 percent of the female respondents are not aware
about the Consumer Protection Act.

11. 70.2 percent of the respondents below 30 years of age are not aware about the
Consumer Protection Act, while 61 percent above 50 years are not aware about the
Act.

12. 74.9 percent of the rural consumers are not aware about the Consumer Protection
Act, while it is 56.3 percent in case of urban consumers.

13. Higher the education levels higher the awareness about the Act. 53.1 percent of the
post graduate respondents are not aware about the Act while it is 95.3 percent in the
case of respondents who have no schooling.

14. Higher the income levels higher the awareness about the Consumer Protection Act.
81.6 percent of the respondents below income level of ` 50,000 are not aware about
the Consumer Protection Act while 58.2 percent of those having an income of ` 5-10
lacs are not aware about the Consumer Protection Act.

15. Out of the respondents who know about the CP Act, 28.9 percent came to know
about it for the last three years, 26.7 percent for the last six years, 14.1 percent know
about the Act for the last 9 years, 13.1 percent know about the Act for last 15 years
and 4.1 percent of the respondents know about the CP Act for more than 15 years.

16. For 41.9 percent of the respondents the source of information about the CP Act has
been family and friends. Media as a source has been indicated by 71.5 percent,
lawyers by 13.2 percent and for 29 percent respondents VCOs have been the source
of information about the CP Act.

17. Out of the respondents who know about the Consumer Protection Act only 19.4
percent could correctly enumerate them which indicates the level of awareness about
the Act.
9
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 18. 59.5 percent could not say whether consumers are well protected under the laws in
the country. Only 26.1 percent said they were well protected. 55.7 percent could not
say whether the CP Act has been implemented well. Only 21.4 percent were of the
view that the Act was implemented well.

19. 60.4 percent of the respondents could not say whether the CP Act favours only
consumers. Only 18.4 percent of the respondents said the Act favours only
consumers.

20. 48.0 percent of the respondents are not aware about the District Forum. 18.9 percent
are aware about the DF to a large extent and 33.1 percent to some extent.

21. 84.9 percent of the respondents knew that a consumer can file a complaint in the
District Forum, 51.7 percent say VCOs can file, 31.3 percent say Government can
file, 30.8 percent are of the opinion that one or more consumers can file a complaint.
Only 33.5 percent of the respondents know that all of the mentioned categories can
file a complaint in the District Forum.

22. Of all the respondents only 4 percent had filed a complaint in the District Forum. 26.6
percent of these had filed the complaint personally, 70.7 percent had engaged the
services of a lawyer and 2.7 percent had filed a complaint through a VCO.

23. 32.4 percent of the respondents who did not file a complaint did so because they had
no knowledge about the law, 33.3 percent felt the procedure was lengthy and caused
delay and 8.0 percent said the forum was located at a far of place from their
residence.

24. Among those who had filed a complaint in the District Forums, 77.6 percent said that
the orders were implemented effectively, 65.9 percent said the District Forum are not
consumer friendly and only 19.3 percent had taken the help of a VCO.

25. Given a choice 60 percent of the respondents said that they would prefer mediation
rather than filing a complaint.

26. Only 12.8 percent of the respondents knew about the District Consumer Protection
Council.

27. 16.4 percent have used the threat of CP Act to restrain the marketers from
exploitation. Out of those who had threatened the business to use the CP Act, 29.2
percent of them said that unfair trade practices had stopped, 41.7 percent said it had
stopped but started after sometimes. 29.2 percent said that business did not bother
about the threat.

28. 75.4 percent of the respondents identified lack of education about consumer rights as
the major reason for failure of consumer movement. 51.4 percent say that consumers
attitude is casual, 68.1 percent blame the ineffective redressal mechanism. 62.3
percent blame the government for insufficient efforts, 62.0 percent feel the business
is too powerful and 57.6 percent are of the opinion that nobody wants to take an
initiative.

29. 88.0 percent of the respondents agree that there is a need for consumer awareness
programmes to educate the consumers.
10
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 30. As far as the agency to carry out the programmes to create awareness is concerned
the respondents preferred that the Government should be involved in creating
awareness, next preference was to Schools/Colleges, next to Gram Panchayats,
then to Electronic and Print Media and NGOs/VCOs was last in order of preference.

31. The medium first preferred by the respondents was electronic and print media,
secondly they ranked that the important days relating to consumers should be
celebrated, NGOs/VCOs were placed at third preference.

32. 80.2 percent of the respondents had heard/seen Jago Grahak Jago campaign. 90.3
percent said the TV was the major source of information, 67.2 percent said Radio,
65.3 percent came to know from newspapers/magazines, and 17.7 percent were
informed by the VCOs.

33. 86.62 percent of the respondents find “Jago Grahak Jago” campaign very
informative.

34. 87.2 percent and 87.5 percent of the respondents are not aware about the National
Consumer Day and World Consumer Rights Day respectively. Of those who knew
about these days only 41.8 percent of them could mention the correct dates.

35. 92.3 percent of the respondents are not aware about NCH/CORE helplines and only
6.4 percent had approached them for help.

Working of the Redressal Mechanism

1. 60.6 percent of the Members of the District Forums are in the age group of 35-50
years while 88.3 percent of the Presidents of the District Forums are above 60 years.

2. 38.0 percent of the Members of the District Forums are graduates with law degree
while 14.1 percent of them are post graduates with law degree which constitutes
more than half the Members (52.1 percent) with a law degree.

3. 44.3 percent of the members were lawyers before being selected to the District
Forums and 11.5 percent of them were government employees. 14.2 percent of the
lady members were housewives with no experience.

4. 69 percent of the members without a law degree did not experience any kind of
problem while handling complaints, while 97.4 percent agreed that a thorough
knowledge of the Consumer Protection Act and the procedures to be followed should
be known by all.

5. The infrastructure requirement seems to be the major problem being faced by the
District Forums in their functioning. 59.7 percent are of the view that the infrastructure
is inadequate. 61.5 percent opined that there is shortage of supporting staff; funds
are not available for day to day functioning and requirements (62.4 percent). Nearly
70 percent say that lab testing facilities are inadequate. 62 percent of the
respondents blame the consumers for non -cooperation and nearly 80 percent say
that there is shortage of stationary.

11
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 6. 72.3 percent of the respondents said that the complaints are not disposed of within 3-
5 months as stipulated under the Consumer Protection Act. Only 27.7 percent of the
respondents said that complaints are disposed within the time limit.

7. Only 10.2 percent of the complaints are disposed within a period of three months,
17.8 percent within 5 months, 18.8 percent takes between 5-9 months, 22.8 percent
of the complaints are disposed within 9-12 months while 19.5 percent of the
complaints take between 1-2 years to be disposed and 10.9 percent of the
complaints take more than 2 years to be disposed. Thus only 28.0 percent of the
complaints are disposed within a period of 5 months, 41.6 percent take more than 5
months and 30.4 percent of the complaints take more than one year to be disposed.

8. 64.0 percent blame the involvement of the lawyers in the District Forums for the
delay. 63.4 percent say the lawyers do not cooperate in speedy disposal of
complaints. 56.4 percent say undue adjournments are asked by them. 78.9 percent
hold technical proceedings responsible for the delay. 79.2 percent feel the consumer
is disinterested after filing the complaint and 79.5 percent say delay is also due to
lack of product testing facilities.

9. 53.1 percent of the respondents say they face problems in the execution of the
orders of the District Forums. 62.0 percent say the District Administration does not
cooperate with the District Forums.

10. In case of product testing, 85.6 percent of the respondents are of the view that there
is delay in sending the report and 97.1 percent of the respondents are of the view
that it is difficult to interpret the report as it is too technical and scientific.

11. Delay in disposal of complaints is cited as a reason by 75.6 percent of the

respondents for consumers not coming forward to file complaints. 84.6 percent say
the compensation amount is too less and 85.0 percent held lack of awareness about
their rights as a reason for consumers not filing complaints.

12. 91.1 percent of the respondents agreed that due to low honorarium, qualified people
are not being attracted to the consumer forums. 95.6 say the honorarium should be
increased. 52.1 percent of the Presidents agreed that it should be atleast ` 25000.
25.1 percent felt the honorarium should be between ` 25000-35000, 16.0 percent
feel that it should be above ` 35000 while 6.8 percent said that it should be equal to
the Presidents as they perform the same work.

13. Indiscipline is not a problem in the working of District Forums say 93.1 percent of the
respondents. 98.3 percent said punctuality is adhered to. 76.9 percent opined that
the functioning of the forums is good. There is a cordial relationship among the
members said 71.3 percent of the respondents. 76.2 percent said members are
involved in judgment writing and 69.3 percent agreed that forums try to mediate
between the parties to solve the complaint.

14. 36.3 Percent of the respondents agreed that they apply CPC, CrPC and Evidence
Act in the proceedings of the forums, 17.5 do so to some extent and 46.2 percent
follow only simple procedures and refrain from using these provisions.

12
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 15. 63.7 percent of the respondents feel that the NGOs/VCOs should play an active role
in filing complaints. 80.9 percent of them said the consumers are not aware about
their rights.

16. 51.8 percent feel the involvement of the lawyers helps the consumers to a large
extent, while 48.2 percent feel it does to some extent. 60.2 percent agreed that
lawyers prolong the cases and 64.0 percent opined that they also make the
proceedings technical and difficult for consumers to understand.

17. 74.8 percent of the members are not aware about the District Consumer Protection
Council. 64.3 percent are unaware of DCPC being constituted in their District.

18. 90.2 percent opined that they do not have funds at their disposal to promote
consumer education.

19. Only 26.7 percent of the respondents are aware about the CONFONET Project but
80.5 percent agreed that computerisation has helped in data management. Only 49.2
percent said that the data is uploaded on daily bases as there are no full time staff to
upload the data, 77.2 percent identified it as the main problem.

20. 72.8 percent say there is no data entry operator, 53.9 percent held poor internet
connectivity as the problem and 58.5 percent blame it on lack of proper
infrastructure. 53.7 feel problems are due to lack of computer education among the
members and the staff. 72.2 percent say that the computers are poorly maintained
while lack of proper hardware and software has been cited as a problem in
computerisation by 82.1 percent of the respondents.

21. 60.2 percent of the respondents have attended a training programmes and 63.2
percent found it to be very helpful in upgradation of their knowledge and skill. Among
all those who have attended a training programme, 73.5 percent attended at IIPA.

22. As far as infrastructure is concerned 63.6 percent of the forums are situated in their
own buildings and 22.7 percent in government building. Library facilities exist only in
64.5 percent of the forums.

23. 86.4 percent of the forums have computer hardware. 77.3 percent have internet
connectivity of their own. 81.8 percent have fax machines and 83.6 percent have also
acquired photocopiers. But internet connectivity is poor.

24. 64 percent cases filed in the District Forums are related to service sector. 55.1
percent of all the complaints filed in the District Forums related to electricity,
insurance, banking and telecommunications.

25. In 40 percent of the District Forums less than 15 complaints are being filed every
month. In 37.3 percent, between 15-30, and in 11.8 percent of the forums between
30-40 complaints and in 10.9 percent of the District Forums more than 45 complaints
are being filed every month.

26. Less than 15 cases are disposed every month by 31.8 percent of the District Forums,
between 15-30 complaints by 30 percent of the forums, 30-45 complaints by 20.9
percent of the forums while 17.3 percent of the forums dispose more than 45
complaints per month.
13
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 27. In the ten District Forums selected for study by the research team in 5 states, the
disposal rate is 90.1 percent, 51.5 percent of the complainants belong to the urban
areas while 48.5 are from the rural areas.

28. 46.2 percent of the pending complaints in the District Forums of Uttar Pradesh were
filed before 2001. 18.2 percent of the complaints in the district forums in the five
states were filed in 2010 and 20.0 percent of the pending cases were filed in 2011.
60.0 percent of the pending of the complaints were filed before 2010 and majority of
them are in Uttar Pradesh.

29. 21.6 percent of the complaints are disposed within a period of 3-5 months, 20.8
percent between 5 months to 1 year, 29.1 percent between 1-2 years, 10.5 percent
take more than three years to dispose the complaint in the ten select District Forums
of five States.

30. 85.2 percent of the District Forums have awarded compensation to the consumers,
6.1 percent have directed to discontinue UTP/RTP. In 5.6 percent of the complaints,
orders have been issued to withdraw hazardous goods and in 3.0 percent of the
complaints orders have been passed to issue corrective advertisements.

31. 11.8 percent of the District Forums have less than 3 staff members to support their
functioning, 74.5 of them have 4-5 supporting staff and 13.7 have supporting staff
between 6-7.

32. 92.1 percent of the supporting staff consists of permanent employees mainly drawn
from other departments on deputation, 5.4 percent of them are on contract and 2.5
percent of the supporting staffs are daily wage earners.

33. 80.66 percent of the respondents said that the staff strength is inadequate and
affects the functioning of the District Forums.

34. 30.2 percent of the respondents were of the view that each District Forum should
have minimum staff strength of 6. 47.9 percent said it should be between 6-9, and
21.9 percent felt the ideal staff strength size would be between 9-12 employees to
carry out the activities of the forums.

Effectiveness of the Redressal Mechanism

1. 74.4 percent of the complainants are males and 25.6 percent are females, 75.2 are
from urban areas and 24.8 percent from rural. 15.3 percent have studied up to
intermediate class. 40.9 percent are graduates, 16.5 percent are post graduates.

2. 28.5 percent of the respondents are professionals, which include engineers, doctors,
architects, lawyers, etc. 16.9 percent are government servants while 14.5 percent are
traders/ manufacturers/ shopkeepers.

3. As far as the annual income of the complainants/ appellants is concerned 26.4

percent have an income of less than ` 50,000-1 lakh, 25.6 percent are in the income
slab of ` 1-2 lakh, 15.3 percent have an income between ` 2-5 lakh and 7.5 percent
have an annual income of more than ` 5 lakh.
14
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 4. 88.8 percent of the cases filed in the three tier redressal mechanism relate to service
sector and only 11.2 percent relate to products. The same is true at all three levels.

5. Before filing a complaint in the District Forum 39.6 percent of the respondents had
tried other methods to redress their problems.

6. 29.6 percent of the complainants came to know about the District Forum from the
lawyers, in case of 27.3 percent the source of information was print and electronic
media and in the case of 21.2 percent of the complainants the family members and
friends were the source of information. 18.2 percent of the respondents acquired
information from VCOs.

7. 77.7 percent of the respondents filed the complaints through the lawyers. It is 92.3
percent in NCDRC, 81.5 percent in SCDRCs and 75.0 percent in the District Forums.
14.9 percent filed personally and 4.1 percent did through the VCOs.

8. Of all the complaints/ appeals filed 47.7 percent are pending, 38.6 percent have been
resolved, 12.0 percent have been admitted and 1.7 percent have been dismissed.

9. Only 28.1 percent of the complainants/ appellants are satisfied with the functioning of
the three tier redressal mechanism. Highest level of satisfaction is with the NCDRC
accounting to 38.1 percent of the respondents.

10. 44.1 percent of the respondents are dissatisfied with the redressal mechanism on
account of delay in disposal of the complaints. 18.6 percent were awarded less
compensation, 16.9 percent said the complaint was not heard properly.

11. 30.8 percent of the respondents of the District Forums were dissatisfied due to delay,
18.6 percent due to award of less compensation. 20.5 percent of them felt the
complaint was not heard properly, 10.3 percent said the order was not executed, 7.7
percent opined that the forum was biased in favour of the opponent and 12.8 percent
were dissatisfied due to time and money involved in litigation.

12. Overall only 33.1 percent of the respondents are satisfied with the procedures
adopted by the three tier redressal mechanism. 76.9 percent however, are satisfied
with the procedure of the NCDRC.

13. Only 15.7 percent of the complainants of the District Forums say that time limit is
adhered to in the admission of complaints, 34.8 percent say in the issue of notice,
29.1 percent in the commencement of hearing. 34.1 percent of the respondents say
that the time limit is adhered in disposal of complaint and 7.3 percent agree that it is
done in case of compliance of orders.

14. Only 29.8 percent of the respondents are satisfied with the progress of the complaint.
Among those who are satisfied, 43.0 percent are fully satisfied and 57.0 percent are
satisfied only to some extent.

15. Of all the complaints disposed by the District Forums only 9.8 percent filed an appeal
against the order in the State Commission, while only 6.1 percent filed an appeal in
the National Commission against the order of the State Commission.

15
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 16. Of all the orders of the District Forums only 6.71 percent of the respondents had filed
an application under section 25 for execution of the orders or section 27 for non-
compliance.

17. 57.0 percent of the respondents say that the staff of the Forums/ Commissions is
supportive and helpful. It‟s as high as 76.9 percent for the NCDRC. 74.3 percent said
that no staff member suggested engaging a lawyer and 65.8 percent did not find any
difficulty in filing the complaint. It is only 61.6 percent for the District Forums.

18. 77.7 percent of the complainants/appellants engaged a lawyer to contest the

complaint. This was because 57.9 percent did not know about the law, 50.8 percent
were not aware about the procedure to be followed. Nearly 40 percent had time
constraint to attend the proceedings and 27.3 engaged lawyers because of distance
from the residence.

19. 73.4 percent of the complainants/ appellants are satisfied with the services of the
lawyers, 61.1 percent are largely satisfied, only 24.4 percent held the lawyer
responsible for the delay in disposal of the complaint.

20. 29.6 percent of the respondents visited the forums/commissions 1-4 times to pursue
their complaint. 5-8 visits were made by 30.4 percent of them, 9-12 by 16.7 percent,
and more than 12 visits were made by 13.3 percent of the complainants/ appellants
to pursue their complaint. The visits are higher at the level of the District Forums.
60.4 percent of the respondents made more than 5 visits to the District Forums to
pursue their complaints.

21. Only 50.8 percent of all the complainants /appellants said their complaint was heard
properly. It is 44.4 percent in the District Forums, 61.5 percent at the State
Commissions and as high as 76.9 percent at the NCDRC.

22. 55.8 percent of the respondents say the President and Members of the redressal
mechanism are punctual in attending the work of the Forums/ Commissions. It is 84.6
percent in case of NCDRC. 63.1 percent for SCDRCs and only 50.6 percent of the
complainants of the District Forums said that the President and Members are
punctual in attending the Forums.

23. 79.8 percent of the respondents are not aware that the VCOs can file a complaint on
behalf of the consumers. Only 5.7 percent had taken the help of the VCOs in filing
the complaint.

24. 60.7 percent of the respondents want free Consumer Guidance Cells to be set up at
all the three tiers of the redressal mechanism.

25. 71.3 percent of the respondents did not face any harassment in the District Forums,
while 28.7 percent faced harassment in varying degree. Only 48.3 percent of them
did not face any harassment in the District Forums of U.P. while 51.7 percent faced
varying degree of harassment.

26. 61.4 percent of the respondents would again file a complaint if the need be.

27. 55.8 percent of the respondents believe that the Forums/ Commissions decide the
cases only on merit. Among those who said yes, 18.5 percent say largely and 57.9
16
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 percent to some extent it is based on merit.

28. In the District Forums 28.7 percent of the respondents said that after filing the
complaint the first hearing commenced after one month, 27.2 percent said after 2
months, 22.3 percent said after 3 months, 11.7 percent say after 4 months and 10.2
percent said the hearing commenced after 5 months or more after filing the
complaints.

29. In the SCDRCs and the NCDRC 23.4 percent of the respondents who filed a
complaint said that the first hearing started after one month, 28.2 percent said after 2
months. 20.2 percent said after 3 months, 9.7 percent said it commenced after 4
months and 18.5 percent said the first hearing commenced after more than 5
months.

30. 33.2 percent of the complainants of the District Forums said the complaint was
disposed within 1-3 hearings, 27.4 percent opined that it took between 4-6 hearings,
21.2 percent said it was between 7-10 hearings; while 18.2 percent said more than
10 hearings were conducted to dispose of the complaint.

31. In the SCDRCs 14.3 percent of the complaints were disposed within 1-3 hearings,
24.7 percent of the complaint took 4-6 hearing, 41.2 percent took between 7-10
hearings and 19.8 percent of the complaints were disposed after conducting more
than 10 hearings.

32. In the District Forums 21.5 percent of the complaints were disposed without any
adjournment being granted. 30.8 percent of the complaints had 1-2 adjournments, 24
percent between 3-4 and 15.6 percent between 4-6 adjournments while in 8 percent
of the complaints more than 6 adjournments were granted.

33. In the District Forums 24.6 percent of the complaints were disposed within 3 months,
26.8 percent within 4-6 months, 16.4 percent within a period of 7-9 months, 10.4
percent within a period of 10-12 months and 21.9 percent of the complaints took
more than a year to be disposed.

34. More adjournments are granted in the SCDRCs. 18.3 percent of the complaints were
disposed without any adjournment, 15.4 percent with 1-2 adjournments, 27.8 percent
with 3-4 adjournments, 28.8 percent of the complaints had 4-6 adjournments and 9.7
percent of the complaints were disposed with more than 6 adjournments.

35. In the SCDRCs 24.1 percent of the complaints are disposed within 3 months, 23.8
percent within 4-6 months, 15.9 percent within 7-9 months, 11.0 percent within a
period of 10-12 months and 25.2 percent of the complaints take more than a year to
be disposed.

10. Recommendations

1. To strengthen the consumer movement in the country the State Governments should
set up a separate Department of Consumer Affairs or atleast a Directorate of
Consumer Affairs with adequate budget and manpower to begin with. However, in
the long term a full-fledged Department of Consumer Affairs needs to be set up. The

17
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 West Bengal and Kerala model would give a boost to the consumer movement in the
country. (Annexure II)

2. The Consumer Protection Councils envisaged under the Consumer Protection Act
can play a meaningful role in promoting consumer welfare. Particularly at the district
level these bodies can also provide a forum for various stakeholders to meet and
share their problems. Therefore, there is a need to strengthen these councils and
ensure that they are constituted and meet regularly.

3. At the District level the President and the Lady Member may be nominated as
members of the Council. Similarly at the State level the President and the lady
member of the State Commission must be nominated as the members of the State
Council. At present in most of the states the members of the redressal agencies are
not members of these bodies.

4. There is an urgent need to strengthen the CONFONET project. At present hardly 15-
20 percent of all the data of the redressal agencies is being uploaded. As a result
there is no mechanism through which an all India data of the redressal agencies can
be retrieved. Unless data and record management improves it would be very difficult
to enhance the efficiency of the redressal agencies. TSP may be provided for
another five years to support the redressal agencies.

5. A large number of service providing departments and organizations have consumer

interface but there is no mechanism to address consumer issues. It would be
appropriate that a middle level officer in each department is designated as Consumer
Welfare Officer both in the central and the state governments.

6. All Government Departments as well as Public and Private Sector Enterprises having
public interface must have a Consumers Complaint Redressal Cell and run it
impartially.

7. The District Forums are the first point of contact for the aggrieved consumers. But
these bodies themselves are not consumer friendly as in none of these three tier
redressal bodies there is a desk to help or guide the consumers. Therefore a “MAY I
HELP YOU DESK” needs to be set up in each of these Forums/Commissions to help
and guide the consumers.

8. The members being appointed to the District Forums by and large lack knowledge
and skill to function effectively. It is time to introduce an objective type written test
(MCQ) for the aspirants of the District Forums to screen them. Only those who qualify
the written test should be called for the interview. This will go a long way in bringing
competent and qualified people as members of the District Forums. (It is already
being done in Andhra Pradesh.)

9. Delay in filling up the vacancies is hampering the working of the three tier redressal
agencies leading to pendency of complaints. Moreover, the State government keeps
the recommendations made by the selection committee for appointment of President
and Members pending for a very long time leading to unnecessary delay and
pendency of cases. The process of filling up of the vacancies of the members of the
District Forums, State Commissions and National Commission must begin atleast 6-8
months before the vacancy actually takes place and the selections finalized at the
earliest.
18
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 10. To fill up the post of Presidents and Members in the District Forums and the State
Commissions, the State Government may make a „Standing Panel‟. The Presidents
and Members of the District Forums, who have very good record, should be
considered for re-appointment. Further, if there is vacancy in a particular District
Forum, that Forum should be temporarily clubbed with the neighbouring District
Forum, so that consumer does not suffer for want of action on the part of the
authority.

11. With a view to attract better talent, a reasonable uniform pay scale of all the
members of the State Commissions and District Forums should be fixed. The
recommendations of the Shenoy Committee (Annexure VI) can be taken into
account.

12. With a view to empower the Presidents of the State Commissions and the District
Forums, to discharge their administrative duties in a proper manner and to exercise
the financial powers and also to enhance their functionality there is a need to declare
the President of State Commission as “Head of Department” and President of the
District Forum as “Head of Office”.

13. The pendency in the State Commissions is increasing, therefore, there is a need to
constitute adequate number of additional Benches considering that, on an average, a
Bench of a State Commission consisting of two Members could not be expected to
dispose of more than 1000 cases in a full year.

14. The State Commissions are not able to exercise effective supervisory control over
the District Forums. As a result they lack accountability and indiscipline is becoming
a major problem. In many of the states even the working hours are not adhered to
and absenteeism has become a major problem. The working of the District Forums
needs to be properly monitored and accountability fixed. Mere disposal of a specified
number of complaints in a month is not an effective measure of the performance of
the District Forums. At present the State Commissions do not have any mechanism
to monitor or supervise the working of the District Forums and the President of the
Commission does not have adequate time to do this. Therefore, the State
Commission may set up a separate Monitoring Cell under a Joint Registrar
(Monitoring) to effectively supervise and monitor the activities of the District Forums
and report to the President of the State Commission periodically.

15. With the increasing workload of the redressal agencies there is a need to have
adequate manpower to man the work of the redressal agencies. At present there is
no uniform staffing pattern. There is no doubt that the current staff strength is
inadequate. The Bagla Committee recommendations on staffing pattern (Annexure
V) may be implemented, with variations depending on the size of the district and the
number of complaints being filed. Similar is in the case of NCDRC/SCDRC.

16. There is a need to have a separate cadre of staff for the redressal agencies as the
staff on deputation has not been able to function effectively due to lack of
administrative control. Judicial work needs permanent trained staff to handle the task
which the staff on deputation is not able to handle. Moreover, by the time they are
acquainted with the work they are transferred.

19
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 17. Capacity building is a major exercise. The Presidents and Members of the District
Forums may undergo 2-3 weeks induction training soon after being selected. The
State ATIs (Administrative Training Institutes) can organize such programmes. If
such programmes are organized by Judicial Academies the members will imbibe
judicial work culture and inculcate judicial mind set, therefore, to avoid this, it is
important to involve the ATIs.

18. The District Forums must be encouraged to organize Lok Adalats to dispose of
pending cases. The help of the District / Taluka Legal Services Authority may be
taken to organize such adalats. At present very few cases are disposed of through
the lok adalats.

19. The three tier redressal mechanism has virtually been hijacked by the lawyers. As a
result undue adjournments are granted leading to delay in disposal of the complaints.
Moreover, at the District Forum due to the involvement of lawyers the proceedings
have become too technical and cumbersome. It may be a good idea to ban the
appearance of advocates in small cases involving less than one lakh rupees. This will
provide great relief to small consumers and also quicken the pace of justice delivery.
It will also encourage more consumers to seek redressal of their complaints. It is to
be noted that lawyers are barred from appearance under the Banking Ombudsman
scheme and family courts.

20. In a recent judgment the Supreme Court has held that it is not necessary to engage a
lawyer but any one with basic knowledge can appear on behalf of a consumer. The
National Commission has been asked to frame the regulations. Such people should
be asked to take up such cases. As a result of this the consumers will benefit a lot
both in terms of quick delivery of justice and it will also be inexpensive. For both the
district forums and the consumers it will be a win-win situation.

21. Except for the National Commission, none of the State Commissions and the District
Forums have their websites with full and updated information for the consumers.
Even the State Commissions which have a website of their own, the information is
out-dated and no regular updating is taking place. Moreover information from a
consumer‟s perspective is not available. Therefore efforts must be made to ensure
that every redressal agency whether at the state level or the district level must have
its own operational website with standards for its regular updating.

22. At present no power is vested in the State Commissions and the District Forums to
review or recall the order of dismissal in default of the cases, and the cases
dismissed for want of prosecution. Similarly, no power of review/recall is vested in the
State Commissions and District Forums, for setting aside the ex parte proceedings
orders. So far the review/recall of such like orders, one has to go to the National
Commission, which results into unnecessary litigation, leading to delay in disposal of
cases. It is recommended that not only the power of restoration of matters dismissed
in default needs to be vested in the State Commission, but also they need to be
conferred the power of reviewing their orders atleast in cases, where there is
apparent error on the face of record. At times lack of power of review results in
miscarriage of justice. However, this power may not be vested in the District Forums
as chances of misusing such powers are high due to local influence.

23. In cases where statutory bodies are complained against, protection is claimed by
such statutory bodies, under the provisions of the Statutes creating them. For
20
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 example, Section 6 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898, provides protection to the
statutory bodies and their functionaries. The provision was made when the country
was under colonial rule and the post office did not make profit, out of the services
provided by them. Keeping in view the interest of the consumers such protection
provided under various laws needs to be reviewed and such protection should not be
available to any statutory body in respect of the activities, which are commercial in
nature.

24. Although at present the provisions of this Act are in addition to and not in derogation
of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force, giving consumers an
additional forum for redressal of their grievances in addition to existing avenues for
the same; the Supreme Court judgement dated 1.9.2009 in C. A. No. 7687 of 2004 of
G. M. Telecom Vs M. Krishnan and another, has completely changed the situation.
The dispute in this case was regarding disconnection of telephone connection for non
– payment of telephone bill. The Supreme Court in its judgement held that when
there is a special remedy provided in Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act
regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the
Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred. It also held that it is well settled
that the special law overrides the general law. This needs to be reviewed.

25. On the lines of the Conference of the Presidents of the State Commission and the
Secretaries in-charge of the Consumer Affairs in the States being organised by the
NCDRC and DCA annually, the State Commissions and the State Department of
Consumer Affairs may organise a conference of the Presidents of District Forums
and District Collectors who head the District Consumer Councils on annual basis.

26. In order to strengthen the consumer movement in the country the major focus has be
to on consumer education and awareness about consumer rights and
responsibilities. An educated consumer is an empowered consumer. Therefore,
vigorous awareness campaign has to be launched using both electronic and print
media. The campaign must have visibility and should not be an occasional affair as it
is at present.

27. The Consumer clubs in schools and colleges are very good institutional mechanism
to involve the youth in the consumer movement. This is very important as children
are the best messengers. The consumer clubs need to be strengthened and
empowered with adequate funds to generate activities. The recommendations of the
study on consumer Clubs conducted by IIPA may be considered to strengthen the
Consumer Clubs. (Annexure VII)

28. There is a greater need to involve educational institutions in the consumer

movement. As a first step the State School Boards may be requested to incorporate
consumer protection in the school curriculum. The UGC may also initiate similar
steps to start courses on consumer protection in the institutions of higher learning.

29. VCOs can play a major role in educating the consumers‟ at the local level. They have
the reach as many of them work in the rural areas. But the need is to build the
capacity of the VCOs to work as an effective organization. There are thousands of
VCOs but the need is to have some standards of performance for these VCOs to be
recognized and funded. BIS could formulate some standards for the VCOs.
Subsequently they could register themselves with the State Government

21
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA
 Departments. Only such VCOs which have been accredited by BIS should be funded
to organize awareness programmes.

30. Capacity building programmes must be organized by the ATIs to orient the officers/
officials of various service providing departments about consumer protection. The
SIRD (State Institute of Rural Development) may also be involved in training the
elected representatives of the panchayat and the cutting edge bureaucracy. A
capsule on consumer protection can be introduced in all the programmes being
organized by the SIRDs. DCA may think of funding such training programmes to the
ATIs and the SIRDs.

31. To educate the consumers at the District and the Taluka level the help of the District
Legal Services Authority and the Taluka Legal Services Committee constituted under
the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 may be taken. The objective is to take the
help of the existing legal and institutional mechanism to educate the consumers and
create awareness at the local level rather than setting up new institutions.

32. The National Consumer Day needs to be celebrated in a befitting manner. This
should be a day of celebration with various activities being planned down to the
Panchayat level. The Consumer Clubs can be roped in to organize various activities
like rallies, nukkad natak, painting competition, debates etc. to create awareness on
consumer issues.

33. There is a need and demand for good quality publicity material relating to consumer
issues. The Department of Consumer Affairs, GoI, may print suitable and innovative
posters, pamphlets, booklets and publicity material on large scale and send it to
various State Commissions, District Forums and other organisations for their use. It
can be both in English and Hindi languages. The same may also be translated in
regional languages by the State Governments for the benefit of general public.

34. Steps are required for Setting up Mediation Centers to try and resolve Consumer
Grievances through Conciliation and Mediation prior to filing of complaints in
Consumer Fora. These Centres should be part of the District Forums and be located
in the Consumer Fora building itself and under the administrative control of the
President of the concerned forum for better monitoring and to reduce overhead
expenditure. Such Mediation Centers for dealing with consumer complaints will help
in reducing the burden on the Consumer Foras.

35. Apart from the Mediation Centres, the Consumer Helplines and CAC scheme needs
to be strengthened. The state governments may be requested to set up the helplines
at the earliest.

22
Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA