Maharashtra Consumer Redressal Crisis: Cases Take Over 600 Days, 64.5% Clearance Rate

Maharashtra Consumer Redressal in Crisis: Over 600 Days Per Case, Low Clearance Rate

Consumer grievance resolution in Maharashtra is grappling with extreme delays, as state and district commissions require more than 600 days to settle a single case. According to the Consumer Justice Report 2026 by the India Justice Report (IJR), this timeline nearly quadruples the statutory limit of 150 days. Consequently, Maharashtra ranks eleventh among 19 major states and struggles with a dismal case clearance rate of 64.5 percent between 2020 and 2024—the lowest among large and mid-sized states.

Severe Delays and Backlog in Case Disposal

The study reveals that the state commission took an average of 662 days to dispose of cases, while district commissions took 612 days. Released on Wednesday, the report also found that over half of the cases filed before the state commission from 2010 to 2024 took more than a year to be decided. Advocate and consumer rights activist Shirish V Deshpande, chairman of Mumbai Grahak Panchayat, emphasized that the Consumer Protection Act was designed to provide simple, speedy, and inexpensive dispute resolution, but this objective has been undermined.

Deshpande shared a poignant example: he has been handling a medical negligence case involving a death that began before the state commission in 1999. Although he received a favorable judgment and compensation order against the doctor in 2015, the case remains pending before the National Commission after the doctor filed an appeal. "The law stipulates that a consumer complaint should be expeditiously decided within 90 to 150 days. Instead, we are witnessing delays of 9 years, 15 years, even 20 years," Deshpande stated.

—

Staffing Gaps and Vacancies Hamper Functioning

The report noted that Maharashtra had no vacancy in the post of president at the state commission in 2025, and 40 district consumer commissions have been established across the state's 36 districts. In addition to the Mumbai bench, six regional and circuit benches of the state commission have also been set up. However, significant staffing gaps continue to affect operations.

• The report highlighted a 36 percent shortfall among members at the state commission in 2025.
• At the district level, there was a 25 percent shortfall among presidents and a 30 percent shortfall among members.
• Staff vacancies at the state commission stood at 15 percent.

In Mumbai city's four district consumer commissions, staff vacancies averaged 33 percent of the 45 sanctioned posts between 2021 and 2025. The report also pointed out that the Mumbai Suburban additional district commission did not have a single female member over the past five years.

Low Clearance Rates and Case Composition

Maharashtra's case clearance rate for the 2020-2024 period was 64.5 percent, the lowest among large and mid-sized states. In Mumbai, the city's four district consumer commissions cleared only 36 percent of the 4,388 cases filed between 2022 and 2025. The study found that nearly 69,700 cases were filed before the Maharashtra state commission over 15 years. Of these, 55 percent were first appeals and 15 percent were original consumer complaints.

1. Insurance complaints accounted for 32 percent of filings.
2. Housing issues followed at 31 percent.
3. Banking disputes made up 11 percent.

Expert Concerns and National Context

Justice (retd) Sanjay Kishan Kaul, former Supreme Court judge, released the report and expressed concern: "The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 was expected to enhance consumer protection capacity in the country. But it is alarming to find that more than half the president and member positions in state commissions are vacant and that not all districts have formed district commissions."

Justice (retd) Madan B Lokur remarked that the report clearly indicates the system is functioning at a subsistence level, with vacancies as high as 40 percent in state commissions. He noted that even forty years after the Consumer Protection Act was enacted, the situation remains dire. "It raises the question: Are these commissions truly grievance redressal bodies?" he questioned.

Maja Daruwala, editor of the India Justice Report, added: "We observe that in consumer commissions, gender diversity is limited to mere compliance, pendency persists, and mediation is ornamental, ultimately weakening the promise of institutional resolution and redress for consumers."

Comparative State Rankings

Andhra Pradesh topped the rankings among large and mid-sized states for consumer justice efficiency. Among small states, Meghalaya ranked first, followed by Sikkim and Himachal Pradesh, highlighting the disparities in consumer protection mechanisms across India.