Are Indian regulatory bodies pettifoggers?

Observers and common public in India seem to be gradually inferring that regulatory/ guiding/autonomous/high powered bodies appointed by the Government of India, are not as effective as they are purport to be.  DGH, PESB, PNGRB, CERC, DGCA el al are powerful bodies created to fulfill specific purposes, address particular issues and regulate various sectors. But are they really serving their purpose? Are they not missing the forest for the trees? Today’s Economics has selected these bodies merely as examples without any intended or unintended malice. No aspersions are being cast nor should be taken. Sources have been approaching to voice concern on the current ecology of regulatory bodies. A healthy democracy, should in fact be strong enough and morally courageous enough, to take stock when it is necessary.  

DGCA is currently in news, among other acts for having ordered AI to sack officials for serious lapses. DGCA has done this only after the recent, unfortunate crash of AI Aircraft at Ahmedabad. But may say there were earlier aberrations but strict action was not imposed. Airlines were let off with warnings and fine. PESB if more in news for rejecting candidates for PSUs, rather than selected them. Of late, it has been suggesting for a rather curious route of “Search Committee” for selecting PSU heads. Many candidates feel that their deserving candidature was rejected without citing specific reasons, leading to questions on ab initio laying down of job descriptions and specifications. They want more transparent guidelines and procedures.  

DGH had no comments to offer on the recent, prolonged ONGC Gas leak in Assam.  It was left to the Minister to step in and assuage the feelings of an enraged local community. Sources state that claims/reparations often get stalled indefinitely. Even prominent Legal Firms are wary of it. PNGRB is known to pass pronouncements which seem to somehow be in favour of private players, rather than promoting Government PSUs. Recently its in in the process of making Government mineral oil Pipelines a common usage property. However, no such Pipeline in Private Sector has been proposed. Strictly speaking it may mean renting out the property of the Government of India but no action under the ToP Act,1882 seems to have been contemplated.  CERC has often passed orders which have been challenged in court leading to wastage of time and money. Electricity Litigation now features prominently in most lawyers’ area of practice. These are but few illustrative examples, from the world of regulatory bodies which observers cite, to claim, that maybe all’s not well.

The role of regulatory bodies is often the subject matter of controversies. Although some do carry statutory powers, most lack the strict set of rigorous conduct/procedures akin to CPC/CRPC. Their decisions can be said to be more akin to executive/administrative diktats. They appear to have an affirmative orientation towards one or another party.  No doubt, a particular case or issue is always debatable and facts and law come into play. But the maxim, justice should not only be done but appear to have been done is equally important. More so as it is one of the founding principles of natural justice and goes even beyond man made laws.  Laws have to adhere to this important tenant. Many experts who have more privy to facts, have of late, started opining, that such bodies should also function as ombudsmen who are not swayed by official dictates. Fair play should never be given a by-pass. But they also point out an unmissable fact that many such bodies are often headed by retired bureaucrats/ex PSU executives. They in their long career, in a particular environment and hereinbefore used to particular structured approach, chain of command, need to know principles etc. may not be ideal material to carry out independent, quasi-judicial functions. Their credentials should be commensurate with the exalted position they hold. And the public outcry re affirms the dictum that Caesars wife should be above suspicion. Today’s Economics does not want to cast any aspersions on these hallowed bodies or the incumbents but it’s also true that the increasing clamor cannot be ignored.

Experts feel that the person(s) heading such bodies should have the necessary background and wherewithal to resist pressures and carry out a more comprehensive job which is acceptable to all. Simultaneously, Rules & Procedures should be more robust, transparent and with due notice to public. Model Rules should be available not only to parties or arguing lawyers but even to the general public since it ultimately impacts them. In camera deliberations should be minimum and ‘open courts’ should be the norm. There should be an audit on the working of these bodies which is not restricted merely to financial aspects. In fact, many experts state that after many decades of working of these bodies, time has come for India to have a regulatory body to regulate the regulatory bodies.