Summary
The Supreme Court directed the National Consumer Commission to discontinue pronouncing operative orders while withholding reasons for lengthy periods. A report identified eighty-five matters awaiting reasoned judgments, and the present case had an eight-month gap. Such delay prejudices both appellate remedies and enforcement. The President of the Commission was asked to take corrective steps, with outstanding reasons to be supplied within two months.
Issues
- What corrective directions were required where operative orders were pronounced but reasons remained unavailable for prolonged periods.
Provisions considered
- Article 21, Constitution of IndiaThe Court reiterated that delayed delivery of judgments violates the right to timely justice, with particular prejudice where operative orders precede reasons by an indefinite period. (¶ Order)
Held
- Withholding reasons prevents an aggrieved party from effectively pursuing a merits challenge and can also prevent the successful party obtaining the benefit of the decision. (¶ Order)
- The order was to be placed before the Commission’s President to end the practice and ensure reasoned judgments accompany operative orders. Reasons still outstanding were to be made available to litigants within two months. (¶ Order)
- These directions concerned the Commission’s judgment-delivery practice; the fresh appeal against the subsequently supplied reasons had already been dismissed separately. (¶ Order)
Result
Appeal disposed of with directions to the National Consumer Commission concerning contemporaneous reasons and delivery of outstanding judgments within two months.