The Supreme Court, in In Re Pay and Allowance of the Members of the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, addressed inadequate pay and service conditions of members of Consumer Commissions. The Court expressed concern that retired judicial officers appointed to District Consumer Commissions in Uttar Pradesh received extremely low remuneration, with some reportedly receiving only ₹5,000–₹10,000 per month. It emphasized that fair and respectable compensation is essential to maintain the dignity and effectiveness of quasi-judicial bodies. The Court also introduced a pendency-based approach to administrative efficiency. States having fewer than 1,000 pending consumer cases may consider abolishing certain District Commissions, subject to concurrence of the jurisdictional High Court and transfer of matters to serving judicial officers. The Court further directed states to comply with earlier orders concerning pay protection and submit compliance reports, reinforcing state accountability and the independence of consumer justice institutions.