New Delhi, March 18 – A report highlighting the massive vacancies and mounting case backlog in consumer grievance redressal systems across the country, says the system's effectiveness is being undermined. The report, based on assessments of consumer court functioning from 2021 to 2025, found that more than half of the positions in state consumer dispute redressal commissions (SCDRCs) remain vacant.
The report stated that between 2020 and 2024, the number of pending cases increased by 21%, from 87,545 to 5.15 lakh. While the Consumer Protection Act mandates that cases be resolved as quickly as possible, the report found that over one-third of cases remained unresolved for over three years.
The report highlights that in states like Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, and Jharkhand, more than two out of three cases were pending for over three years. Former Supreme Court judge S K Kaul lamented the crisis and the mounting case backlog, saying they erode consumer confidence in the redressal mechanism.
The report indicates that consumers are primarily concerned about deficiencies in service, particularly in the insurance, housing, and banking sectors. Data obtained through Right to Information and parliamentary replies reveals that as of 2025, approximately half of the state commissions and one-third of district commissions lacked a sitting president, while nearly 40% of the 159 sanctioned member positions were vacant.
Seven SCDRCs – Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Arunachal Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh – had over 60% vacancy among member positions. Notably, Arunachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Himachal Pradesh had no members in their SCDRCs.
Out of the 20 SCDRCs, only 10 – Haryana, Kerala, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, and Delhi – had a president throughout the last five years.
The report categorizes states by population to ensure fair comparison of consumer case disposal. Andhra Pradesh topped the list, followed by Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. Andhra Pradesh was praised for its efficient budget utilization, with only 4.8% of its cases pending for over three years.
In the small states category, Meghalaya, Sikkim, and Himachal Pradesh were ranked first, second, and third, respectively. Conversely, states like Telangana (19th) and Manipur (9th) were at the bottom of the capacity index.
The study also found that 88.5% of the 7.64 lakh cases filed in 35 state and 68,551 district commissions had been disposed of between 2020 and 2024. Tamil Nadu had the highest case clearance rate (114.6%), clearing 29,585 cases out of 25,825 filed. Maharashtra had the highest number of cases filed, but the lowest clearance rate (65%).
These findings are significant in light of a recent Supreme Court intervention addressing the financial burden on states with low caseloads. In February 2026, the court allowed high courts to hear consumer appeals where state commissions are non-functional or not constituted due to low pendency. The court directed the transfer of pending cases to jurisdictional high courts, where a single judge would decide them, preferably within three months, while permitting smaller states to propose alternative mechanisms.
The study also flagged under-utilization of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Regarding gender diversity, the report found that representation remained limited. In 2024, only Delhi and Sikkim had a woman president among the 19 state commissions. However, one-third of the members in the 19 SCDRCs were women, exceeding the 20% recommended by the Consumer Protection Act. From 2021 to 2025, the share of women among members and presidents in these SCDRCs declined from an average of 35% to 29%.
The India Justice Report (IJR) called for urgent reforms, recommending time-bound appointments, better staffing aligned with caseloads, improved budget utilization, transparent data publication, forward-looking capacity planning, and greater reliance on mediation to reduce pendency.
