NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said that in the Indian legislative system, where most bills are introduced by govt and very few private members’ bills are presented and debated in Parliament, it becomes the apex court’s duty to direct performance audit and assessment of impact of legislations.
While upholding constitutional validity of provisions of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) relating to pecuniary jurisdiction of district, state and national consumer foras, a bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Manoj Misra asked the Central Consumer Protection Council (CCPC) and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to “survey review and advise the govt about measures for effective and efficient redressal and working of the statute.”
Two petitioners had challenged the validity of the provisions of the 2019 legislation on the ground that the 2019 Act shifts the basis of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district, state as well as national commission from value of compensation claimed under the repealed 1986 Act to value of the consideration paid for the goods and services
Writing the judgment and emphasising the need for periodic review of legislations to understand its working and changes required, Justice Narasimha said, “A peculiar feature of how our legislative system works is that an overwhelming majority of legislations are introduced and carried through by the Government, with very few private member bills being introduced and debated.”
“In such circumstances, the judicial role does encompass, in this Court’s understanding, the power, nay the duty to direct the executive branch to review the working of statutes and audit the statutory impact.”
“It is not possible to exhaustively enlist the circumstances and standards that will trigger such a judicial direction. One can only state that this direction must be predicated on a finding that the statute has, through demonstrable judicial data or other cogent material, failed to ameliorate the conditions of the beneficiaries,” he said.
The SC said before directing such audit, the court must prima facie conclude that the statutory schemes and procedures “are gridlocked in bureaucratic or judicial quagmires that impede or delay statutory objectives. This facilitative role of the judiciary compels audit of the legislation, promotes debate and discussion but does not and cannot compel legislative reforms.”
Referring to CCPC and CCPA, the bench said, it is necessary to ensure that in the functioning of these bodies, there is efficiency in administration, expertise through composition, integrity through human resources, transparency and accountability and responsiveness through regular review, audits and assessments.
“Vibrant functioning of the Council and the Authority will subserve the purpose and object of the Parliament enacting the 2019 legislation,” it said..”
