Orissa High Court Issues Contempt Notices to Odisha Chief Secretary Anu Garg Over Consumer Commission Vacancies
The Orissa High Court has issued contempt notices to Odisha Chief Secretary Anu Garg and Principal Secretary of the Food Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department, Sanjay Kumar Singh, over the alleged failure of the state government to fill long-pending vacancies in the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC).
The court’s action follows allegations that the Odisha government failed to comply with its earlier directions, issued on August 20, 2025, requiring it to take appropriate steps to fill vacant positions within six months.
A two-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M.S. Raman issued the notices while hearing a contempt petition concerning the alleged non-implementation of its previous order. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on November 26.
Contempt Petition Highlights Continued Administrative Inaction
The contempt petition was filed by Sonali Swain, a resident of Cuttack, through her advocate Mohit Agarwal. The petitioner alleged that despite the High Court’s clear directions and the stipulated six-month timeframe, the state government had failed to take the necessary steps to address the vacancies.
The original Public Interest Litigation (PIL) had drawn attention to the prolonged vacancies in the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and their adverse implications for the effective functioning of the consumer grievance redressal mechanism.
The latest proceedings have brought the issue back into focus, particularly the responsibility of the state administration to ensure that statutory consumer forums are adequately staffed and operational.
RTI Disclosures Reveal Prolonged Vacancies in Key Positions
Information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act and referred to in the contempt petition reportedly revealed that several important positions in the commission had remained vacant for extended periods.
According to the details cited by the petitioner, the vacancies include:
* President, SCDRC: The position has reportedly remained vacant since July 3, 2023.
* Member: One of the four sanctioned member positions fell vacant on March 4, 2026.
* Joint Registrar: The post has reportedly been vacant since February 28, 2023.
In addition to these senior positions, several other posts across the commission’s administrative establishment are also reportedly unoccupied. These include:
* Personal Assistant
* Senior and Junior Stenographers
* Junior Assistant
* Driver
* Process Server
* Five Peons
The petitioner contended that the prolonged vacancies have affected the commission’s administrative capacity and its ability to discharge its statutory responsibilities efficiently.
The absence of adequate personnel is particularly significant for consumer dispute redressal institutions, which are expected to provide accessible and timely remedies to individuals seeking relief against unfair trade practices, deficient services and other consumer-related grievances.
What Did the High Court Direct in August 2025?
While disposing of the original PIL on August 20, 2025, the Orissa High Court had underlined the statutory obligation of the state government to provide adequate manpower and administrative support to the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Referring to Section 46 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the court emphasised that ensuring the effective functioning of the commission was a responsibility that the government could not disregard.
The court also observed that consumers approaching quasi-judicial institutions for the resolution of their grievances should not be made to suffer indefinite delays because of administrative deficiencies and staff shortages.
Its directions were aimed at ensuring that the commission had the necessary institutional support to perform its adjudicatory and administrative functions effectively.
Government Asked to Begin Recruitment Six Months Before Vacancies Arise
An important aspect of the High Court’s August 2025 order was its direction that the state government should initiate recruitment procedures at least six months before an anticipated vacancy arises.
The objective was to prevent disruptions in the functioning of consumer commissions by ensuring that recruitment and appointment procedures were undertaken sufficiently in advance.
Such advance planning, the court indicated, was necessary to maintain institutional continuity and facilitate the timely disposal of pending consumer disputes. However, alleging that the government had failed to implement these directions within the prescribed period, the petitioner subsequently approached the High Court with the contempt petition.
Chief Secretary Anu Garg and Principal Secretary Sanjay Kumar Singh Receive Notices
Taking cognisance of the allegations of non-compliance, the division bench directed that contempt notices be issued to Chief Secretary Anu Garg, a 1991-batch IAS officer of the Odisha cadre, and Principal Secretary Sanjay Kumar Singh.
The notices bring the functioning of the concerned administrative departments and their responsibility for implementing the court’s earlier directions under judicial scrutiny.The matter is scheduled to come up for hearing on November 26, when the court will further examine the allegations concerning compliance with its August 2025 order.
The proceedings have once again highlighted the importance of adequate staffing, institutional accountability and timely administrative action in ensuring the effective functioning of consumer dispute redressal institutions.
For Odisha, the immediate challenge is to address the long-standing vacancies and ensure that the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is equipped with the personnel required to deliver timely justice to consumers.
