Supreme Court Questions Consumer Forums Becoming Sinecures for Retired Judges
The Supreme Court of India has expressed serious concern over district and state consumer forums increasingly becoming sinecures for retired district and high court judges. The apex court acknowledged that it had previously issued sweeping orders to activate these forums without fully considering the low pendency of cases in many regions.
Low Workload in Northeastern States and Union Territories
During a hearing on February 11, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard from several northeastern states and Union territories about the minimal workload in their consumer forums. Arunachal Pradesh reported only 59 pending consumer cases across its district and state forums. The state revealed that despite advertising for a president for its state consumer forum, no retired judge showed interest in the position.
Other regions presented similar data:
- Sikkim has 64 pending cases: 52 in district forums and 12 in the state forum.
- Mizoram has 94 cases: 82 in district forums and 12 in the state forum.
- Manipur has 166 cases: 123 in district forums and 43 in the state forum.
- Lakshadweep has a total of 10 cases.
- Andaman and Nicobar Islands have 41 cases: 37 in district forums and 4 in the state forum.
- Goa has 39 pending consumer cases.
Unnecessary Burden on the Exchequer
The bench agreed that establishing fully staffed district and state consumer forums in areas with such low case pendency places an unnecessary financial burden on the exchequer. This situation effectively turns these positions into sinecures for retired judicial officers and high court judges, offering little substantive work.
Reflecting on the Supreme Court's past approach, the CJI-led bench stated, "We are also fond of issuing sweeping directions without realising the ground realities. The presidents of district consumer forums are on a par with district judges but look at the workload of the two. The district judges are overburdened whereas the consumer forums in these states have no work. Why should the president of a district forum be equated with a district judge?"
New Mechanism for Low-Pendency States
In response, the bench has decided to collect data from all states on case pendency in district forums. For seven states and Union territories with low pendency, the bench transferred pending cases to the concerned high courts. Under this new arrangement, the high court chief justice will assign consumer forum work to one of the judges, who will serve as the forum president and hear cases alongside state forum members.
Appeals against orders from these forums can be filed with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). Additionally, the bench allowed states and Union territories with fewer than 1,000 pending consumer cases to submit alternative proposals for grievance redressal mechanisms. Some states have suggested appointing part-time members to district consumer forums as a cost-effective solution.
This move aims to streamline consumer dispute resolution in low-workload areas while reducing unnecessary expenditure and addressing the issue of sinecures for retired judges.
