Consumer Protection Act 2019 has come into force from 20.07.2020 with several added features to safeguard interests of consumers. But big question is why some basic root-level changes are not incorporated either in the Act itself or by simultaneous modifications in existing system.
National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAPP) presently working under Department of Revenue should be shifted to Department of Consumer Affairs. Unfortunately there is no provision of entertaining feedback and suggestions coming from experts either by NAPP or by so many bodies constituted under Consumer Protection Act 2019. There must be some body which may have power to study and implement suggestions (if feasible) so that problems may not arise at root-level required to be tackled by NAPP or other bodies constituted under Consumer Protection Act 2019. For example, there is no provision for preventing cheating through gimmick-packaging which can and should be simultaneous through amendment of rules for packaged commodities for compulsory packing of commodities in packs of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000 and multiples of 1000 basic units like grams or millilitres. This formula should be for drugs also unless exemption is sought for dose-wise administration.
A popular branded shaving-cream introduced publicising 33-percent extra with break-up as 94 gms as original weight and 31 gms as 33-percent extra, thus making total pack of 125 gms just to befool consumers. Such print on packs could be logical only if the product with 94 gms packing would have been already in the market, but was evidently not so because such a gimmick pack was itself an introductory product. If packaged commodity rules are simultaneously modified, there would not have been any need to file complaint. Practically no consumer has time and resources to approach authorities regarding such complaints of general nature. Therefore problem of gimmick befooling packaging must be solved by basically modifying rules.
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL