Supreme Court Seeks Centre, States Reply On Plea For Consumer's 'Right To Know'
The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Centre and the states on a plea to declare consumers had a "right to know" about products aside from the details of distributors and sellers.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta sought the responses within four weeks.
The petition filed by petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay said "right to know" was crucial for consumers to make informed choices and to protect themselves from unfair or restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation.
The plea sought directions to the authorities concerned to ensure every distributor, trader and shop owner displayed details of registration, including name, address, phone number and number of employees at the entry gate in bold letters on a display board visible to people.
"Right to know helps consumers avoid falling prey to a fraudulent or deceptive distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner, who might misrepresent a product/service or disappear after sale, purchase and money transaction," said the plea, filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey.
If a consumer has an issue with a product or service, the plea said, knowing details of the distributor, dealer, and seller was essential for filing a complaint and seeking redressal through consumer redressal fora.
"When a distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner are transparent about their details, it fosters a fair and competitive market where consumers can make informed choices," the plea said.
The plea further argues that the the right to know empowers consumers to be informed or protected and to make choices when engaging in sales, purchases and money transactions.
The petitioner underlined not only does the consumer have the right to know about quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard, manufacturing date, expiry date and BIS or FSSAI certification of the goods or products, but also the details of the distributor, dealer, trader, seller and shop owner.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Support in sight: India plans cushion for US-hit sectors; new export mission to aid MSMEs, explore new markets
AI image The government may prioritise targeted support for sectors such as textiles and chemicals, those expected to be severely affected by the new 50 per cent US tariffs, under its export promotion mission, industry sources said on Thursday. As per the news agency PTI, the matter was taken up during consultations held by the commerce ministry with exporters from the textiles and chemicals sectors to evaluate the fallout of the US decision and explore support mechanisms. Sources cited by PTI claimed that the Centre is working on the structure of the Rs 2,250 crore export promotion mission, which was announced in the Union Budget earlier this year. The plan is likely to include easy credit schemes for MSMEs, facilitation of warehousing overseas, e-commerce promotion, and global branding initiatives to help Indian exporters access new markets. 'The government is looking at extending support measures under this mission to sectors which would be badly hit by the US tariffs,' one source said, as quoted by PTI. Textiles exports from India to the US are currently worth around $11 billion, accounting for 9 per cent of the US's total textiles imports. Similarly, chemical exports are pegged at about $6 billion. US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, effectively doubling the total duty to 50 per cent from August 27. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is this legal? Access all TV channels without a subscription! Techno Mag Learn More Undo The move was in response to India's continued purchases of discounted Russian oil, which surged following Western sanctions on Moscow after the Ukraine war. At the meeting, exporters urged the commerce ministry to provide fiscal incentives, including interest subvention and an extension of schemes such as RoDTEP (Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products) and RoSCTL (Rebate of State and Central Taxes and Levies). They also sought timely release of dues, simplified advance authorisation norms, and lower port charges. Exporters have also made a representation to the GK Pillai committee on RoDTEP-related concerns. As per PTI, industry sources added that several exporters have begun looking at alternative markets. "The world trade is disrupted, and in this, there are possibilities of export diversification. Export promotion councils are working on this. The commerce ministry is also analysing," one person said. They added that high tariffs may push Indian manufacturers to explore domestic demand more seriously, thereby reducing imports and helping the country's trade balance. The new tariffs come just weeks ahead of the sixth round of India-US trade negotiations, scheduled for August 25. Washington is pressing India for duty concessions on industrial goods, dairy, wines, EVs, and genetically modified crops. India exported goods worth $86.5 billion to the US in 2024-25, with textiles, leather, chemicals, and machinery among the top categories. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays .
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Would rather go for fresh bidding process: Erstwhile BPSL promoters to SC
The erstwhile promoters of Bhushan Power and Steel (BPSL) on Thursday told the Supreme Court that even though the resolution plan of BPSL was 'flawed', they would rather go for a fresh bidding process. 'If the plan is flawed, I don't want to go for liquidation. I want a fresh process. Even in liquidation, the first priority is to sell the company as a going concern,' Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta, appearing for the erstwhile promoters of BPSL, told the Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, and Justice Vinod Chadran. The apex court last Thursday recalled its 2 May judgment that declared JSW Steel Limited's resolution plan for BPSL 'illegal' and ordered the latter's liquidation—four years after the company was acquired under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). A Division Bench led by the CJI had allowed the review of the 2 May judgment and decided to hear the appeal challenging the resolution plan afresh, after which the arguments continued on Thursday. Mehta, who appeared for the BPSL promoters, told the apex court that the committee of lenders did not have the power to reopen or modify a resolution plan after it was approved. Responding to the question of his capacity to approach the court, he said any aggrieved person could approach the NCLT or NCLAT (appellate tribunal) to challenge the resolution plan. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for lenders of BPSL, however, said that BPSL was the creator of the problem since they siphoned off 'thousands of crores'. The court will now hear the arguments on Friday, when SG Mehta is expected to argue. Last Thursday, the court had said the 2 May judgment did not appear to be in line with settled precedents and required reconsideration. Experts said the recall of the order in the context of IBC was certainly a rare incident. 'The present marks a 'first of its kind' instance which reflects a much larger principle that the Court is willing to reconsider its orders if deemed necessary in the larger interest,' said Shiv Sapra, Partner at Kochhar & Co. Tushar Agarwal, Founder & Managing Partner of C.L.A.P. Juris, said recalling of orders via exercise of power under Article 142 is very rare and happens in the rarest of rare cases. 'In such cases of liquidation and challenge of NCLAT order, there are no precedents of recall of order,' he said. Shri Venkatesh, Founding Partner of SKV Law Offices, said that similar to the exceptional intervention in the Bhushan Power case, the DMRC-DAMEPL case is another rare instance where the Supreme Court, at the curative stage, set aside an arbitral award despite the award having undergone four rounds of judicial scrutiny and being partially enforced, with significant sums paid and parties restructuring their affairs in reliance on its finality. 'Other cases wherein the Supreme Court has recalled its orders are the Ganpati Dealcom case (2024), wherein the Supreme Court recalled its 2022 judgment that struck down Sections 3 and 5 of the Benami Transactions Act,' he said. Further, in the Vishnu Vardhan fraud case (2025), the Court applied the principle that 'fraud unravels everything' to set aside its own 2022 judgment in Reddy Veerana, he cited. 'Similarly, in the Karnail Singh land law case (2024), the Court recalled its 2022 verdict for failing to consider a Constitution Bench precedent, observing that 'ignoring the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court would amount to a material error, manifest on the face of the order',' he said.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
‘BJP taking credit, but we paid half': Priyank Kharge on Bengaluru Metro inauguration
Karnataka Minister Priyank Kharge on Thursday took aim at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), accusing the Union government of conveniently overlooking the state's equal financial contribution to the Bengaluru Metro project. Congress leader Priyank Kharge.(File) Speaking to reporters, Kharge said, 'Let the BJP take all the credit if they want, but they seem to forget that Karnataka has funded 50% of the project. The Metro isn't solely a Central government achievement.' Also Read - Bengaluru Central MP PC Mohan hits back at Rahul Gandhi, says 'voters are not Congress property' Kharge, who is the Minister for IT/BT and Rural Development, pointed out that Karnataka's economic indicators — from its top rank in the IT sector to strong showings in GST collection, foreign direct investment (FDI), and GDP, speak for themselves. 'Our purchasing power parity is also the highest. So, tomorrow if I do good work, will they attribute that too to the BJP? This logic doesn't hold,' he said, questioning what he called the BJP's habit of monopolising credit. His comments come just days before Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to inaugurate the long-awaited Yellow Line of Namma Metro on August 10. Also Read - Siddaramaiah slams Trump's tariffs, accuses PM Modi of 'headline management' over national interest Echoing similar sentiments, Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar had earlier underlined that both the Centre and the state share ownership of the project. 'This is our Metro. The Prime Minister was invited by the Chief Minister and me to inaugurate the Yellow Line, and he has agreed. The state and Centre both have 50% stake in the project. This is not a one-sided initiative,' he said during a site inspection earlier this week. Shivakumar, who also holds the Bengaluru development portfolio, added that serving citizens should take precedence over political point-scoring. 'What matters is that the public benefits from the project, not who gets to put their name on it.' The new Yellow Line, a 19.15-km stretch featuring 16 stations, has been built at a cost of ₹7,610 crore. The inauguration ceremony will be held at the Indian Institute of Management, Bengaluru, followed by a symbolic ride in the Metro train by the Prime Minister, Chief Minister, and local legislators. Shivakumar also said the state would use the opportunity to submit a formal request to the PM for funds required to acquire land for the proposed double-decker flyover project (With agency inputs)
