Consumers should get front-row seats in tribunals

New Delhi: The union ministry of consumer affairs should ensure that the first row of seats in every consumer tribunal in the country is reserved for consumers who seek redress before these commissions without the assistance of advocates.

It is indeed ironic that the consumer tribunals, whose raison d’etre is protection of consumer rights, do nothing to protect their rights and privileges in the very precincts of the consumer commissions, where the front seats are all occupied by the advocates as a matter of right and consumers are relegated to the back benches and many times forced to give up even those seats.

Even though the exclusive consumer justice system came into existence to help consumers resolve their complaints against goods and services without the aid of lawyers and in an atmosphere of informality and simplicity as distinct from regular courts, complainants who appear before these quasi judicial bodies do not get the respect due to them and it begins with the seating arrangements. Yes, consumers do not have the privilege of sitting in the front row in these tribunals , because that is the exclusive domain of the advocates.

Unfortunately, even the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure ) Regulations, 2020, drawn up by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission last July, fails consumers here. The regulations lay stress on how the tribunals should look and feel different from the courts and accordingly suggest several measures to ensure this.

However with regard to seating, it merely says that the commissions “shall give proper respect and courtesy to the parties who appear in person and shall provide separate accommodation in the Hall for the convenience of the parties”.

Instead of ‘separate accommodation’ the Regulation should clearly mandate that the first row be reserved for such consumers, because in many consumer tribunals around the country, the ‘separate accommodation’ is a bench stacked against the wall in an obscure corner and they may well be asked to vacate even these seats, if members of the bar do not have a seat! Surely, consumers are not second class citizens in these special tribunals!

I must mention here the case of PC Jose Vs Nandakumar (July 26, 1993, Kerala high court), where PC Jose, a litigant who was fighting his case without a counsel, refused to get up for a senior lawyer and was asked to pay a penalty by the court. In response to his appeal , arguing that the constitution guarantees equality (Article 14 ) before law, the Kerala high court quoted the Advocates Act and said in a court room, members of the bar have certain privileges as officers of the court and it was open to the presiding officer to direct members of the public, even if they are litigants, to vacate their seat for the advocates.

Well, whatever be the practices and procedures before these courts, they obviously cannot be applied to the consumer commissions because firstly these are not regular courts and secondly, these commissions are meant for consumers to fight the case on their own and thirdly, consumers have the preferential right in these forums meant exclusively for them. In fact on several occasions the government has considered barring advocates from these quasi-judicial bodies altogether.

Having said that, I must emphasise that over the years, several factors. including the slow and complicated procedures, repeated adjournments, the high cost of fighting the case (if you hire a lawyer) and the miserly computation of compensation, have all made a mockery of the ‘quick, simple and inexpensive’ justice promised under the consumer protection law. And this is reflected in the dwindling number of consumers approaching these tribunals. The number of those who seek justice without the help of lawyers, has fallen even more sharply.

There is thus an urgent need to not only change the way these commissions function, but also give consumers due respect and encourage them to fight their battles without the help of lawyers. ‘Consumer Assistants’ at these tribunals can make a difference, so also the ambience that gives the consumer the confidence to approach these commissions on their own.