Consumer Commission in West Bengal is acting like a "Muhalla Legal Aid Clinic", it indicates a serious deviation from its intended role under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 Consumer Commission in West Bengal is acting like a "Muhalla Legal Aid Clinic", it indicates a serious deviation from its intended role under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Why Is This a Problem?

1. Consumer Commissions Have a Defined Legal Role:

   • Consumer Commissions are quasi-judicial bodies meant to adjudicate consumer disputes, not function as informal legal aid clinics.

   • They must conduct hearings, examine evidence, and issue legally binding orders.

2. Lack of Proper Proceedings & Orders:

   • If the Commission is not following proper judicial procedures and instead acting like a local dispute resolution forum, it can undermine consumer rights.

   • Orders passed under such informal settings may lack legal standing and can be easily challenged in higher forums.

3. Denial of Due Process:

   • Consumers are entitled to a structured legal process with clear arguments, documentary evidence, and reasoned orders.

   • A casual, advisory approach can result in cases not being properly decided.

4. Government Negligence in Strengthening the Commission:

   • The state government is responsible for ensuring fully functional commissions with appointed Presidents and qualified members.

   • The current situation suggests that the Consumer Protection Mechanism is being diluted in West Bengal.

What Can Be Done?

 

What Can Be Done?

1. Filing a Legal Challenge:

   • If a Presiding Member is acting as President without proper appointment, an appeal or writ petition can be filed challenging their authority.

2. RTI to Obtain Appointment Details:

   • File an RTI seeking clarification on:

     • Who authorized the Presiding Member to act as President.

     • Whether there was a proper appointment order.

     • Any government action to appoint a lawful President.

3. Escalating to National Consumer Commission (NCDRC):

   • A complaint can be filed with the NCDRC or the Ministry of Consumer Affairs regarding the improper appointment practices in West Bengal.

Presiding member cited as President in Charge is not lawful and adhered to the Consumer Protection Rules

 Presiding member cited as President in Charge is not lawful and adhered to the Consumer Protection Rules

Why is it Unlawful?

1. Legal Requirement for Appointment:

   • The President of a Consumer Commission must be appointed as per the prescribed procedure by the appropriate state or central authority.

   • A Presiding Member does not automatically assume the role of President, unless explicitly provided for in the law or through a valid appointment process.

2. Violation of Consumer Protection Rules:

   • The Consumer Protection (Qualification for Appointment, Method of Recruitment, Procedure for Appointment, Term of Office, Resignation, and Removal of the President and Members of the State Commission and District Commission) Rules, 2020, outline the exact process for appointing Presidents.

   • If a Presiding Member is designated as ‘President In-Charge’ without proper legal backing, it goes against these rules.

3. Impact on Legitimacy of Orders:

   • Decisions made under an unauthorized ‘President In-Charge’ may be challenged in higher forums for lack of jurisdiction.

   • This can further delay justice for consumers and lead to unnecessary legal complications.

Crisis in Consumer Commissions of West Bengal: A Detailed Overview

 

Crisis in Consumer Commissions of West Bengal: A Detailed Overview

The consumer dispute redressal system in West Bengal is currently facing a major crisis due to the absence of Presidents and Members in several Consumer Commissions. This has resulted in severe delays in handling consumer cases, leading to frustration among complainants who seek justice. Furthermore, even when members are present, their lack of expertise in consumer law affects the quality of decisions, making the entire system ineffective.

---

Key Issues Faced

1. Vacant Positions in Consumer Commissions:

   • Many District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions (DCDRCs) and the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) in West Bengal are operating without a President or sufficient members.

   • The absence of key personnel has caused a significant backlog of cases, delaying justice for consumers.

2. Lack of Competence Among Appointed Members:

   • Even when members are appointed, some lack the legal expertise or proper understanding of consumer laws, leading to improper handling of cases.

   • This results in flawed or delayed decisions, defeating the purpose of consumer protection laws.

3. Increase in Case Backlogs & Consumer Frustration:

   • Due to staff shortages, hearings are repeatedly postponed, leading to a significant backlog of unresolved cases.

   • Consumers who approach these forums in search of quick and fair resolutions are left frustrated, as cases drag on for months or even years.

4. Negligence by the State Government:

   • The state government is responsible for appointing the President and members, but delays in recruitment suggest administrative negligence.

   • Despite consumer protection being a fundamental right, the government’s inaction has weakened the effectiveness of these commissions.

WRITTEN OBJECTION TO THE EXPARTE VACATING PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT

 

District : South 24 Parganas

 

In the Court of the Learned 9^th Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas

 

                                                          Misc. Case no.      AC/745/2023

 

                                                          In the matter of ;

 

Smt. Putul Mondal,

                ________Aggrieved Person

 

-      Versus –

 

Kartik Mondal,

                   ___________Respondent

 

WRITTEN OBJECTION TO THE EXPARTE VACATING PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT;

The humble petition of the above named Aggrieved Person;

 

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

 

1.   That the Petitioner has filed the present case under the provisions of Section 12 & 23 the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking protection, monetary relief, and appropriate orders from this Learned Court against the Respondent due to acts of domestic violence perpetrated against the Petitioner.

 

2.   That the Respondent has filed an Ex Parte Vacating Petition with the oblique intention to delay the present case, and to harass the petitioner.

 

3.   That the Ex Parte Vacating Petition filed by the Respondent is not maintainable in law and is devoid of any merits, as the several opportunity has been given to the respondent to contest the present case which he defy.

 

4.   That the Petitioner has been subjected to severe acts of domestic violence, both physical and emotional, and the relief prayed before this Learned Court is necessary to prevent further harm and ensure the safety and well-being of the Petitioner.

 

5.   That the Respondent, through the present petition, is attempting to misuse the process of law to evade legal accountability and deny the Petitioner the protection she is legally entitled to under the applicable domestic violence statutes.

 

 

6.   That the reasons stated by the Respondent in the Ex Parte Vacating Petition are misleading, false, and do not hold any substantial legal ground for vacating the Ex Parte order.

 

7.   That the Petitioner seeks the dismissal of the Ex Parte Vacating Petition made by the respondent with exemplary cost.

 

8.   That this application is made bonafide and in the interest of administration of Justice.

 

 

PRAYER:

 

In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, it is most respectfully prayed that this Learned Court;

 

(a)    Be pleased to dismiss the Ex Parte Vacating Petition filed by the Respondent, with costs;

 

(b)    Pass such other and further orders as this Learned Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice and equity.

 

And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AFFIDAVIT

 

I, Smt. Putul Mondal, Wife of Sri Kartik Mondal, aged about 52 years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation House Wife, residing at Premises being no. C/42, Jamuna Nagar, Post Office – Mukundapur, Police Station – Purba Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700099, District – South 24 Parganas, do hereby solemnly affirm and says as follows;

 

1.   That I am the aggrieved person in the present application. I am acquainted and conversant with the material facts stated in the foregoing paragraph of this application. I am competent to swear this affidavit.

 

2.   That the statement made in paragraph no. 1, 2, & 3, are true to my knowledge and belief and the rests are my humble submissions before the Learned Court.

 

That the statements made above are true to my knowledge and belief.

 

 

 

 

 

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

 

Advocate

Prepared in my Chamber;

 

Advocate

Date : _______________2025,

Place :Alipore Police Court,

 

N O T A R Y

 

 

 

Extension Petition of Stay Order

 

In the Court of the Learned District Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas

 

                     Title Suit No. 09   Of 2024

                  

                                                          In the matter of ;

Sri Subhro Ghosal,

__________Plaintiff

 

-          Versus –

 

Subhadeep Mazumder,

          _______Defendant

 

Extension Petition of Stay Order dated 20-12-2024;

 

The humble petition of the above named Plaintiff, most respectfully;

Sheweth as under;

 

1.   That the Plaintiff instituted the above referred Suit for Permanent Injunction restraining Infringement of Copyrights, Damages, Rendition of Accounts of Profits, Delivery Up, etc. under Section 55 of the Copyright Act 1957, against the Defendant, before the Learned Court. The Plaintiff also placed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code’ 1908, for an order for ad-interim injunction restraining the Defendant, his partners, proprietors, his officers, servants, agents, men and all persons, firms, corporations, and associations in active concert or participation with the defendant from photocopying / reproducing and issuing illegal / unauthorized copies of the plaintiff’s publication or substantial portion thereof, including but not limited to publication of the plaintiff included in Annexure – “A’ in any manner whatsoever, and / or from doing any other act amounting to infringement of the Plaintiff’s copyright, till the disposal of the present suit, in the interest of administration of Justice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.   That the said application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2, read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code’ 1908, has been heard by the Learned Court on 20^th day of December’ 2024, and the Learned Court was pleased to pass necessary order of ad-interim injunction is allowed in favour of the plaintiff for a restricted period till 20-01-2025, vide Order dated 20-12-2024. The operative paragraph of the Order dated 20-12-2024, is reproduced herein as follows;

 

“The defendant and his partners, proprietors, men and/or agents are, hereby retrained from producing and/or issuing unauthorized copies of the Plaintiff’s publication or any part thereof as per Schedule –“A” of the instant application and/or from infringing the copyright of the Plaintiff’s literary work/ drama till 20-01-2025”.

 

3.   That the Plaintiff states and submit that the Plaintiff has communicated the said Order dated 20-12-2024, to the Plaintiff with the copy of the Plaint as well as the copy of the application for ad-interim injunction and the copies of the documents relied on by the plaintiff, which the defendant is in receipt of the communication of the said Order dated 20-12-2024, and removing the said alleged video from his youtube channel, but at the same time after few days later it has been observed that the defendant through some other person trying to play the said purported alleged video through the different means of Social media i.e. Facebook, etc.

 

4.   That therefore the Plaintiff seeks the extensions of the said Order of Stay dated 20-12-2024, passed in Title Suit no. 09 of 2024, till the disposal of the present Suit, in the interest of administration of Justice.

 

5.   That unless, the Learned Court grant extensions of the said Order of Stay dated 20-12-2024, passed in Title Suit no. 09 of 2024, till the disposal of the present Suit, the Plaintiff will highly prejudice and suffered with irreparable loss and injury thereof.

 

 

 

 

 

6.   That this application is made bonafide and in the interest of administration of Justice.

 

It is therefore prayed that your Honour would graciously be pleased to allow this application and to extend the Order of Stay dated 20-12-2024, passed in Title Suit no. 09 of 2024, till the disposal of the present Suit, in the interest of administration of Justice, and /or to pass such other necessary order or orders as your Honour may deem, fit, and proper for the end of Justice.

 

And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.

 

 

Schedule –“A”

 

The Plaintiff’s literature/ drama work which has been cited as “TELEPHONE” having Registration No. L-136483/2023, dated 21^st day of November’ 2023.

Number	Class of Work	Title of Work	Applicant Name	Communication Address	Status
23619/2022-CO/L	Literary/ Dramatic	TELEPHONE	SUBHRO GHOSAL	APPAYAN APARTMENT, GROUND FLOOR, FLAT-GC, 108/11/(50) PURBACHAL ROAD (NORTH), HALTU, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL-700078	Registered

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affidavit

I, Subhro Ghosal, Son of Uday Sankar Ghosal, aged about 41 years, residing at Premises being No. 331, Jyotish Roy Road, Kolkata - 700053, Police Station – Jadavpur, District – South 24 Parganas, and also at “Appayan Apartment” Ground Floor, Flat-GC, Premises no. 108/11/(50), Purbachal Road (North), Haltu, Police Station – Kasba, Kolkata - 700078, do hereby solemnly affirm and says as follows;

1.   I am the Plaintiff in the present suit instituted by me against the defendant. I am acquainted and conversant with the material facts. I am competent to swear this affidavit.

This is true to the best of my knowledge & belief.

 

2.   The statements made in the paragraph nos. 1, 2, & 3, are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and the rests are my humble submissions before the Learned Court.

This is true to the best of my knowledge & belief.

 

3.   The statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

 

 

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

 

Advocate

 

Prepared in my chamber,

 

 

Advocate

Date : _______________2025;

Place : Alipore Judges’ Court

 

NOTARY

In the Court of the Learned District Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas

 

                                         Title Suit No. 09 Of 2024

                  

                                                          In the matter of ;

Sri Subhro Ghosal,

__________Plaintiff

 

-          Versus –

 

Subhadeep Mazumder,

                             _______Defendant

 

 

 

 

Extension Petition of Stay Order dated 20-12-2024;

 

 

                                          

 

Advocate – on – Record for the Plaintiff;

 

Sanjib Saha, Advocate

High Court Calcutta

Chamber : P-16, Purbasha Pally, Dr. A.K. Paul Road, Kolkata – 700034, Mobile No. 9051570268, 7003781930, Email : sanjibsaha.smc@gmail.com