Vijay Bhat, Author at WEMA

Our Comments related to DOCA Ref: I-9/6/2025-W&M Dated 09-09-2025 Notice for inviting Public Comments on the proposed Draft Amendment in the Legal Metrology (Approval of Models) Rules, 2011

Vijay Bhat — Thu, 18 Sep 2025 09:05:34 +0000

This is a common subject related to public interest in Legal Metrology sector. Our comments as under have been forwarded via email on 18^th September 2025, to Director with copy to Secretary and Joint Secretary Department of consumer affairs GOI and also uploaded on our website https://www.wema.co.in under information section, to facilitate access.

Subject matter is a Proposed draft released for public comments by Department of Consumer Affairs. It recommends fixed validity period for model Approvals on the grounds (a) To replace obsolete models, not adequate to serve current requirements (b) reassessment to ensure models maintain accuracy and reliability to bolster consumer trust and market integrity (c) to promote innovation and provide time line to manufacturers to enhance design, long term durability and resistance to tampering or inaccuracies.

At the outset we are absolutely pleased to note the consumer centric intent of Department of consumer affairs, for which weighing industry has been following up for many, many years with the concerned regulatory authorities and other related government agencies, as per material on record.

There is no hesitancy in stating that the chosen focus area is misplaced. What actually requires earnest and meaningful upgrade is Legal Metrology (General Rules) 2011, which is more aligned to mechanical era, partially to OIML (International organisation of Legal Metrology) recommendations and BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) finds hardly any mention. Said General Rules are partly replicated from OIML recommendation R 76 1992 which is now obsolete and remains since replaced with new version OIML R76 2006. Also, the component of OIML recommendation R60 is completely missing in it. What is intended to be achieved through draft amendment is very much achievable through more effective and determined implementation of prevalent Model Rules like — Rule 7(1) – that covers Tests for Approval of Model, for sustained accuracy and reliability and by invoking Rule 13— for revocation of certificate of approval of obsolete models and the ones not up to mark to cater to present day needs. This can pave the way for new improved and latest versions of models and thus take care of obsolescence issue. Religious adherence to testing parameters as per existing Rule will achieve the rest as proposed in draft amendment. Furthermore, the importance of process of thorough honest inspection and verification need to be drilled in to the concerned. Enhancing accountability and addressing shortcomings of traceability, non-uniformity due to multiple interpretation of rules and stretched resources will deliver desired results more than a patchy short-term arrangement. It is also worth noting that Rule 3 and Rule 4 of Model Rules provide for recognition of every laboratory desirous of obtaining such recognition for taking up the job of testing and recommending the models for approval to government. It also stipulates that List of such recognized laboratories be notified from time to time. Format of the application for applying remains notified by MOCA F&PD on 19^th March 2014 vide notification ref S.O.824(E). How many laboratories remain notified till date? It is nil as per RTI information. We only know of government owned five RRSLS notified till date.

Further details of the facts in support of afore said contention are stated below: –

As per Rule 20 of Model Rules and section 22 of Legal Metrology Act, Approval of Model precedes grant of licence to manufacture.
No weight and measure can be manufactured in deviation to standards as specified by or under the Act. Act means Legal Metrology Act 2009 and under the Act means Legal Metrology Rules 2011. In case of deviation penal provision under section 27 of the Act gets invoked.
Grant of Model Approval and subsequent manufacture of weights and measures is supposed to be strictly as prescribed in 7^th schedule of General Rules 2011. Parameters prescribed cover construction of an instrument, metrological characteristics, metrological properties, indications, errors, accuracy class, verification scale intervals, minimum capacity etc. Besides, test procedures are specified during verification and inspection with respect to evaluation of error, weighing test – linearity, hysteresis, temperature, influence factors, weighing test during substitution method, discrimination test, eccentricity test etc.

Any change or upgradation in standards for betterment has to begin with incorporation of the same in General Rules. Once reflected in General Rules, it will automatically percolate down and result in revocation of obsolete models and grant of new model approvals for subsequent manufacturing as and when warranted.

With no change in General Rules, fixed tenure of model approvals will only tantamount renewal of existing approvals which is akin to renewal of licenses at fixed intervals. Probable 0utcome may be, no gain at a considerable cost and time besides encouraging unease of doing business.

As per Rules manufacturing licence cannot be renewed in absence of Model Approval. This means, blanket approval of Models after a fixed periodicity will also result in suspension of manufacturing activities, irrespective of grace period or not, till the time approval is sought/ repeated
For the last few years DOCA has been aggressively advocating for circular economy to ensure extended functional life of products. Accordingly, Right to Repair portal was launched. Approval of Models at fixed periodicity runs against this concept.

It also runs against the concept of BRAP (Business Reforms Action Plan) of the Government. BRAP 2024, sector specific implementation guide for central ministries/ departments/states/ includes Legal Metrology under Area 18.

The post Our Comments related to DOCA Ref: I-9/6/2025-W&M Dated 09-09-2025 Notice for inviting Public Comments on the proposed Draft Amendment in the Legal Metrology (Approval of Models) Rules, 2011 appeared first on WEMA.

Effective Skilling – An Unavoidable Need

Vijay Bhat — Thu, 04 Jul 2024 05:13:30 +0000

India with 18% of the world population, is the most populous country in the world. This constitutes 52% males and 48% females. Being number one in any sphere has its own challenges. Providing dignified life to a population of > 140 crores, in terms of fulfilling their needs and aspirations, if not daunting, is a task of great responsibility. Increase in population demands commensurate alignment with gross domestic product, gross national product, level of industrialization, per capita income, employment opportunities, employability skills, wide spread infrastructure, general standard of living, administrative and regulatory control.

India at present is being recognized as world’s fast-growing large economy, set to overtake Germany in very near future to attain number 3 rank. Demographic advantage is forecasted in its younger work force. Median age of 28-30 years, is estimated to stay for around two decades.

Drawing comparisons with other countries, faced with challenges of ageing population may not be of much help. We will be better off in leveraging this natural advantage towards maximizing the associated benefits. Greater weightage to the factors like employment opportunities, employability, skilling, reskilling, upskilling, inclusivity and future readiness may help us considerably.

There is no denying that our GDP growth is better amongst major economies and consistent for some time now. Perhaps there is need to realize that our per capita income, which although has grown over the past, is still far below others. Bangladesh, a much younger country has better ranking. Per capita income of a country has much to do with raising inclusive prosperity, standard of living, job opportunities and employment rate.

According to the world bank collection of developmental indicators, total work force in India in 2023 was reported to be 59.37 crores. When we talk about work force, it encompasses all persons who are working, seeking work or are unemployed or available for work, generally in the age group of >15 years and may extend up to 64 years. It covers males, females, skilled and unskilled.

According to periodic labour force survey annual report 2023 from NSSO (National sample survey office), there appears a positive trend so far as LFPR (labour force participation rate is concerned). In 2017-18 it was 49.8 % (Male-75.8, female-23.3). In 2022-23 it is 57.9 (Male-78.5, female-37.0). Same is true with WPR (worker population ratio). In 2017-18 it was 46.8 (Male-71.2, female-22). In 2022-23 it is 56 (Male-76, female-35.9).

India remains poised to take advantage of its demographic dividend. There is improvement in education levels which has increased aspirations. Any Gaps between aspirations and jobs available have potential to increase unemployment rate. Government has taken measures to facilitate job seeking through NES (National Employment Service). It operates through network of employment exchanges for regular jobs and self-employment. Rozgar Melas are held where employers from high growth sectors, Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Kendra’s (PMKK), National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC), Sector Skill Councils (SSC) and job seekers come together for employment purpose.

For India to become HR capital of the world, skilling, reskilling and upskilling has to be multi-dimensional. It is necessary because of rapid technological changes and digitization. Continual upgradation of skills is unavoidable. Government has embarked on various schemes for skill development and employment.

To name a few: –

Skill India Mission. It is an autonomous body for skill training
Technical and vocational education training (TVET). It includes technical and soft skills
Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVVY)
Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Kendra’s (PMKK)
Digital India- To make the country digitally empowered society and knowledge economy
Prime minister’s Employment Guarantee Programme (PMEGP). It is a credit linked subsidy programme for generating self-employment
Startup India- To build ecosystem for innovation and entrepreneurship in India
PLI Schemes- Production linked incentive schemes to boost output and employment
Sector Skill Councils (SSCs) for various business sectors– For Identification of training needs, framing curriculum for various job roles, partnering with training centers nationally and imparting core and soft skills. Objective is to enhance employability and generate job ready labour force
Excellence canters—Various Industries and confederations all over the country have started excellence centers for imparting advance skills and create a present and future ready work force

Suggestions that may be of some use: –

Our growth story needs to be employment intensive, sustainable, consistent and futuristic to contain unemployment at any stage. Healthy employment elasticity is required to be maintained
Skill development has to be inclusive and not restricted to high growth sectors alone
Skills imparted need to remain aligned to continual technological changes and high digitization. Global perspective needs to be weighed while focusing on enhanced employability
To create an ecosystem that encourages increased participation from Women work force
To create social awakening about shared responsibility at house hold level
Integration of Vocational training with school education.
Policy framers to constitute government, industries, Academia and subject experts
Further impetus to self-employed enterprises
Increase in economic Activity for more LFPR so that house hold income does not get irrationally divided and per capita income remains maintained at optimum level.
Monitor performance and efficacy of skill centers periodically and address the limitations
Review the targets given to skill centers rationally related to enrolment and employment. Ensure timely flow of funds for smooth functioning

While imparting Skills training, greater emphasis needs to be on effective learning for effective application and better employability. At this point of time, it may not be much about revenue and profits. This is valid for all government, private and joint partnership institutions. High growth and profits will automatically follow from the sectors employing such trained people.

Vijay Bhat

The post Effective Skilling – An Unavoidable Need appeared first on WEMA.

Too Little Too Late

Vijay Bhat — Fri, 03 May 2024 08:32:30 +0000

We keep on hearing through press reports and organizational campaigns that we are already on the path to Viksit Bharat. Factors like economic growth, social progress and environmental stability have a greater role to play in development of our country. The process can rightly be accelerated through effective citizen and business centric reforms, ease of living, innovation, discipline and transformative behaviour. Mile stones are already defined. As per IMF, India will be 4th largest economy after overtaking Japan by 2025 and 3^rd after overtaking Germany by 2027. All are optimistic that by 2047 India will acquire status of a developed country.

It is time to take stock of reforms already accomplished and the ones underway. This will give us an idea about where we stand and whether we need to pace up.

I will be confining my detailing to Legal Metrology, in particular to weighing sector.

Legal Metrology Act came in to being in 2009 and became operational from 1^st April 2011 along with Legal Metrology General Rules 2011.

In the last thirteen years two big tick reform have taken place so far as weighing sector is concerned. Rest all amendments have been towards addressing misinterpretations at enforcement level, although the Act does not lack clarity.

Few amendments branded as reforms speak for themselves: –

(1) Legal Metrology (General) Amendment Rules,2012—- Rule 21 already existed in this regard. 21A has been added to elaborate Conditions, etc. for manufacture of a non-standard weight or measure exclusively for scientific investigation or research, mandating prior approval from DOCA.

(2) Legal Metrology (General) Amendment Rules, 2016. ——- Automatic instruments for weighing road vehicles in motion and measuring axle loads introduced. Progressive and a big tick reform in the direction of market expansion.

(3) Legal Metrology (General) (Amendment) Rules, 2021,3 March 2021

(i) Avoidance of double stamping. Progressive step

(ii)Machines used by industries for internal use need no reverification.

Act already contained clear cut stipulation that machines not used for transaction and protection do not come under the ambit of verification.

Ten years taken to implement the Act provision. A case of misinterpretation

(iii) All types of Weights and measures used for domestic use to be verified at manufacturing state.

This amendment has been pushed against the provisions of the Act. Machines used for domestic purpose do not come under transaction and protection category and fall beyond the ambit of verification, as covered in (ii) above.

Ambiguity introduced

(iv) Clause on availability of straight track and gradient of not more than 1:400, is an essential requisite for obtaining stipulated accuracy in weighing in motion rail weighbridges as remains also reflected in RDSO specifications.

In spite of industry recommendations against it, this clause was omitted, under scoring potential threat to weighing accuracy.

Ambiguity introduced

(4) Dealership Licence under section 23 of the Legal Metrology Act 2009, clarification circular dated 12^th December 2022 issued to settle so called ambiguity.

A case of misinterpretation

The Integrated Goods and Services Tax or IGST is a tax under the GST regime that is applied on the interstate (between 2 states) supply of goods and/or services. The IGST is governed by the IGST Act and became effective from July 2017.

Contrary to no legal requirement for a dealership license in different states, except for the manufacturing state where from the product is sold under IGST regime, such licence was being insisted upon by enforcers at ground level.

Misinterpretation ruled for good 5 years before being addressed

(5) Legal Metrology (General) Amendment Rules, 2022. 4^th October Rule 29

Allowing the companies, having different establishments or branches or different units in any establishment or branch to nominate an officer who has the authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the establishments or branches or different units instead of allowing only the nomination of a Director.

Above stipulation is already part of Legal Metrology Act 2009, section 49 (2) under explanation column. As per standard legal rule, in case of any ambiguity between the Act and Rules, provision of the Act prevails. Still amendment was warranted as enforcers at ground level did not accept it.

Case of ignoring the Act in the name of misinterpretation that ruled for 13 years

(6) OIML Certification System introduced in India

Progressive and a big tick reform

Legal Metrology Department of consumers affairs India is now an OIML issuing authority under OIML certification system, besides other 12 out of 63-member countries, conforming to accreditation standard ISO/IEC 17065. RRSL Ahmedabad is duly accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 for carrying out testing in this regard. Presently its scope in weighing includes only non-automatic machines and rest are to be included in due course. Besides earning foreign exchange, it opens opportunities for manufacturers to place their products in global market. Also, Certification scheme helps to avoid unnecessary re-testing when obtaining national type evaluations and approvals. By this approach, the measuring instrument type needs to be tested only once by an approved laboratory.

Reforms underway as per our knowledge

Couple of years have already gone by. Many interactive and heedful consultative meetings have taken place with the Regulator. It is hoped that we are nearer to resolutions.

List is big but Some critical and chronic issues are being touched upon: –

(1) One nation one standard for testing of Weighing Machines

Crucial requirement while testing the machines is that of Test weights. Different states apply different yard sticks and there is no uniformity in the quantum of test weights to be used and who is to provide these weights. Rules are unclear and not uniform. in case of higher capacity machines like Lorry Weighbridges, the cost of these weights works out to 2 to 3 times the cost of the machine. Regulator is fully aware of this limitation and had introduced test vehicles in some states to address the issue. But it is not a uniform practice all over the country. More than anything else, the given unclarity reduces verifiability at ground level, fosters opaque discretion in the hands of few and has potential of being misused.

(2) Certification of Machines

Section 24 of Legal Metrology Act 2009 mandates verification of weighing instruments after manufacturing and before sale and use. Thereafter recertification every year. It calls for physical visits of LMOS whose population ratio visa vis machines is estimated to be 1: > 110000. Resultant effect is long wait time, inventory hold up, capital blockage, operational disruptions and delivery failures. Being conscious of the problem, government introduced GATC Rules 2013 for third party certification. It did not take off because of lack of viability, as it is expected to cater to retail sector partially, using non-automatic weighing machines up to 15okg capacity only. It excludes 31 business sectors of India including MSMES, Large Industries, Mines & Minerals, Logistics, PSU, Railways etc. In the last 11 years it has also lost its alignment with the real market conditions. Amendments brought in the intervening period, only increased its complexity.

Practice of self-certification was proposed and Regulator could find some merit in it and thought expressed was to try it on pilot basis with some manufactures of repute. Nothing concrete has emerged thus far.

(3) Inclusion of Load Cells in Schedule — Heading A {Rule 13} L.M General Rules 2011

It was principally agreed in meetings by the Regulator, in order to ensure manufacturing of world class products in India.

(4) Inclusion of following exclusions from OIML recommended list under OIML -CS in India.

Load Cells, Automatic Catch Weighers, Automatic Rail Weighbridges and Weighing Road vehicles in Motion

It was principally agreed in meetings by the Regulator that in the interest of market expansion and to lend impetus to foreign exchange earnings, it will be accomplished sooner

It has rightly been said that justice delayed is justice denied. Same holds true in case of delay in redressal of ambiguities and misinterpretations of Rules. Ambiguity occurs where there is a lack of clarity or when there is uncertainty about the application of a law. Its direct result, if not addressed, is increased litigation and increase in pendency of cases in courts. It further overburdens the litigants economically and reduces productivity. After all we are all humans and possess both positives and negatives. Therefore, we cannot rule out some sections amongst us thriving on such ambiguities. Delayed correction means only prolonging such negativity. HDI (human development index) is one of the major rating criteria’s for determining the status of a developed country besides gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product (GNP), the per capita income, level of industrialization, amount of wide spread infrastructure and general standard of living. Similarly delay in reforms means missed opportunities, which can prove costly at national level, particularly when mile stones are already defined.

There is no denying that DOCA is all willing to extend regulatory support to stake holders and it has been demonstrated time and again. To speed up the process of reformation, it is highly important to take enforcement agencies of states effectively on board and to percolate down the importance of such reforms at national level.

We have every hope that reformation process will be accelerated and results of the same will be visible to all stake holders in near future. To facilitate that, link of this blog is being sent to Secretary consumer Affairs, Additional Secretary consumer Affairs and Director Legal Metrology for their kind perusal and action.

On the way to finding solutions, WEMA is ever committed to work with the Govt in furthering its agenda of reformation and transformation towards realising the bigger goal of ‘Developed India’.

The post Too Little Too Late appeared first on WEMA.

Regulatory Focus and Efficacy

Vijay Bhat — Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:09:20 +0000

Regulations are necessary in a progressive society for the purpose of maintaining discipline, order, balance in all spheres and protect interests of stake holders. It is more achievable by creating a framework that is open, transparent, consultative and rational. Regulations can be more effective if used in right measure. Imagine a society in absence of regulations, it could be truly chaotic with free will prevailing all around. At the same time excessive, faulty and irrational regulations can do more damage than good.

Advantages of Regulations

Holding people and businesses accountable for their actions
Ensuring balance between business and public interest
Protecting human rights and right to privacy
Encouraging healthy competition
Avoidance of business monopolies
Ensuring social, economic, health and digital security
Preventing revenue leakages
Ensuring quality products, services and manpower
Better working conditions

Limitations of Regulations

Time consuming
Non-uniformity gives birth to confusions, excessive discretions and subjectivity
Large amount of administrative work
Regulatory costs
Flawed regulations may prove ineffective and more costly
High level of regulations may affect competitiveness of a country
Regulations open to varied interpretations, may result in Legal challenges, disputes and more costs.
Over regulations may breed non-compliance and impede growth

Evolution is a natural, continuous and universal process. At any given time, there can be lot of unknowns that only come up over time. Expecting regulations to remain relevant and effective inordinately is unrealistic and unproductive. Changes are warranted as and when transitions happen. Lack of compliance to a particular standard is a matter of thorough study and no amount of over regulations can fetch compliance. What comes to my mind here is GATC Rules 2013 under Legal Metrology Act 2009. After thirteen years, it is still not implemented. No amount of enhanced eligibility criteria brought in, could make it implementable. Rather complexity has increased.

As per economic survey of 2020-21, increasing the complexity of regulatory provisions reduces verifiability and fosters opaque discretion in the hands of the enforcer. The optimal solution is to have simple regulations combined with transparent decision-making process. As per Economic Survey the solution is, to avoid substituting supervision with more complex regulations.

To regulate any subject, Legal Acts are framed by the act of parliament/legislature. To implement the provisions of the Act, enforcement Rules are made to act as supplements for ensuring compliance. In case of any doubt between the two parent Act prevails.

It will be pertinent to mention here that pendency of court cases in India has touched 5 crores. It is also estimated that government by far is the largest litigant with share percentage of 50%. Verdicts take too long and frequent adjournments are supposed to be the main cause of pendency. The first sufferers are litigants. It is rightly said, “justice delayed is justice denied”. Litigation is a costly activity and has macroeconomic effects when it comes to business.

Coming to Legal Metrology Act 2009, it appears to be well framed with least unclarity. The problem lies in misinterpretation of the provisions of the Act and the resultant ambiguity in combination with nonuniformity, in General and enforcement Rules, designed to implement the Act. It is further explained by way of few illustrations: –

Section 24 of the Legal Metrology Act 2009 makes verification and stamping mandatory for weighing instruments used in any transaction and protection barring some exemptions under section 55 of the Act. This substantiates that weighing instruments, not coming under the ambit of transaction and protection, need not to be verified and stamped.

As per section 2(u) of the Act “transaction means”: –

any contract, whether for sale, purchase, exchange or any other purpose, or
any assessment of royalty, toll, duty or other dues, or
the assessment of any work done, wages due or services rendered

As per section 2(k) of the Act “protection means” the utilization of reading obtained from any weight or measure, for the purpose of determining any step which is required to be taken to safeguard the well-being of any human being, animal, plant or vegetation.

Effects and after effects of misinterpretation

Weighing instruments used by industries for internal purposes do not fall under the definition of transaction and protection as per provisions of the Act, as explained above. Therefore, do not come under the ambit of stamping and verification. Enforcers on the ground interpreted it differently. Considering, Act came in to being in 2009 and was implemented from April 2011, for good 10 years misinterpretation ruled and industries continued to be victims of regulatory overreach till right interpretation was accepted in 2021.
Section 49 (2) of the Act under explanation column, allows the companies having different establishments or branches or different units in any establishment or branch to nominate an officer who has the authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the establishments or branches or different units. For 12 years, until 2022, misinterpretation continued in General Rules by ignoring this explanation and allowing only Directors to be nominated for the purpose. Industries with pan India presence experienced great difficulty as every small matter had to be dealt with by the chief of the company himself besides managing over all affairs of the business.
One more misinterpretation of the provisions of the Act, that relates to domestic scales is yet to be addressed. Domestic scales are completely beyond the ambit of transaction and protection as defined in the Act. When we weigh baggage at home, the purpose is to assess the weight to keep it within permissible limits as far as possible. The actual weight/ allowable excess weight at an extra charge is determined by the scale used by airlines at the airport. Rightly the weighing scale used at airport falls under transaction and protection category and not the one used at home. Same is the case with sample weighing of grocery at home. The scale used at grocery shop falls under transaction category and can be complained against in case of any doubt. Likewise, for body weighing, reading obtained that becomes the cause of action, emanates from the weighing instrument used at health center, doctor’s clinic, sports center or Gym that fall under protection category.
Practice of stamping and verification of domestic scales is prevalent only in India amongst OIML member countries and beyond. It is not a luxury to own such a weighing instrument and is also within the means of middle-class households. Middle class in India is surging with estimated yearly growth rate of around 6% and constitutes 31% of India’s population. Given, growing spending power of middle class, take off of such scales should have been much higher. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Regulatory constraints appear to be restricting growth of this business.
Silver lining is, the present positive situation. DOCA team, is holding consultations with stake holders to fast track resolution of issues and usher in an era of unambiguity, uniformity, rationality and transparency. In pursuit of this, series of meetings with stake holders have already taken place under the chairmanship of Hon’ble Secretary consumer affairs. Continuity of this process gives us confidence that new India is strongly on the path of reformation for all-round development and growth and the nation is well poised to become 3rd largest economy of the world in the next three years.

The post Regulatory Focus and Efficacy appeared first on WEMA.

Weighing Industry in Market Expansion Mode

Vijay Bhat — Wed, 06 Dec 2023 12:38:52 +0000

In order to achieve something, it may be required to embark on what has not been done earlier and tap what has been left untapped. Working in silos may not help. Whole fraternity including Regulator need to work together, join hands and exchange ideas for the greater good of the Nation and its economy. Composition below is an attempt in that direction.

National Model Approval and OIML Certification System

What is Model Approval

Model signifies final representation of a weighing instrument. It has to conform to Legal Metrology (General Rules) 2011 Rule 13, as regards physical characteristics, configuration, constructional details, materials, performance, tolerances and such other details corresponding to specifications laid down for such measuring instrument in 7^th and 8^th schedule for MPE (maximum permissible error).

Who requires it

As per Section 22 of L.M Act 2009, every person, before manufacturing or importing any weight or measure shall seek the approval of model from such authority as may be prescribed.

Model Approval may not be required in respect of any cast iron, brass, bullion or carat weight or beam scale, length measures.

Provided further that the prescribed authority may, if he is satisfied that the model of any weight or measure which has been approved in a country outside India conforms to the standards established by or under this Act, approve such model without any test or after such test as he may deem fit.

Is Model Approval required for Weighing instruments imported from outside India and approved by the authorities there

Yes, such approval is mandatory in India. Testing may or may not be done depends upon the satisfaction level of the authority concerned.

Link between model approval and manufacturing / Import.

As per Rule 20 of Model Approval Rules 2011 “License to manufacture W&M when to be issued”: –

Before issuing a license to manufacturing or importing any weight or measure, the state government shall satisfy itself that a certificate of approval of model of such W & M has been granted by the central govt. under section 22 of the Act.

Who all can import W & M

As per section 19 of the Act, no person, Importer, retailer or manufacturer can import without being registered with Director L.M. Also, as per Rule 15 of L.M General Rules 2011, any manufacturer can register himself as importer. Registration is valid for 5 yrs. and can be renewed every 5 yrs.

Difference between Model Approval and OIML (International Organization of Legal Metrology) certification

Model approval happens at national level and is country specific. OIML CS is an international certification system.

About OIML Certification System

Legal Metrology Department of consumers affairs India is now an OIML issuing authority under OIML certification system, besides other 12 out of 63-member countries, conforming to accreditation standard ISO/IEC 17065. RRSL Ahmedabad is duly accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 for carrying out testing in this regard. Presently its scope includes only 4 measuring instrument categories, namely, material measures of length, water meters, non-automatic weighing instruments and liquids other than water duly covered under OIML recommendation numbers, R35, R49, R76 and R117 respectively. Other measuring instrument categories that are yet to be included are automatic catch weighers under R51, load cells under R60, automatic rail weighbridges under R106 and weighing road vehicles in motion under R134. It is encouraging to know that all the inclusions are now covered under OIML scheme A, as the other measuring instrument categories have already transited from scheme B to scheme A.

OIML certification system actually started in 1991-92 with R49, R76 and R60 and the system was called OIML Basics. It did not enjoy much acceptability for the reason that the issuing authorities and testing laboratories would self-declare their competence without conforming to international accreditation standards. Since coverage and acceptance was least, redressal of limitations became essential. Improvisation was done around 2005 that gave birth to OIML Basics and MAA. The system was combination of basic and mutual acceptance arrangement between member countries. Some countries followed accreditation standards and others continued with the same basic system. Subsequently further upgradation happened and OIML-CS came in to operation on 1^st January 2018 with the participation of 20 countries then. According to this system it was made mandatory for testing labs to conform to ISO/IEC 17025 and for issuing authorities to ISO/IEC 17065. Initially Old and new systems worked parallelly under scheme A and B. For certification of measuring instruments under scheme A it was a prerequisite condition that both testing laboratory and issuing authority conform to international accreditation standards. Target of 2 Yrs. was set for transition of all the remaining instrument categories from scheme B to scheme A. The target was adhered to and transition completed. By 2020 only scheme A was operational and continues to operate.

OIML certification system of 1 January 2018 subsequently covered remaining measuring instruments of Scheme B, under its scheme A. Broader objectives of this certification system are: –

OIML-CS to harmonize the work of national bodies that are responsible for the type evaluation and approval of measuring instruments subject to Legal metrological control
Manufacturers who wish to market their products in different countries to get benefitted so far as national approvals are concerned. OIML-CS being an evidence that their instrument type complies with the requirements of the relevant OIML Recommendation.
Certification scheme helps to avoid unnecessary re-testing when obtaining national type evaluations and approvals. By this approach, the measuring instrument type needs to be tested only once by an approved laboratory.
OIML member countries may remain morally obliged to implement OIML recommendations as far as possible.
Offers more opportunities for manufacturers to place their products on a global market.

Possible alignment of national regulations with OIML recommendations and to accept OIML test results for national model approvals has found wider acceptability and has proved as a path breaking achievement for both domestic as well as overseas manufacturers.

As rightly maintained in press briefings by honorable secretary consumer affairs, it will auger well for businesses, both in terms of increase in exports and foreign exchange earnings.

It is estimated that India is the biggest importer of Load cells from overseas, particularly from China. Load cells are load sensing devices, considered to be heart of weighing machines and play pivotal role in ensuring weighing accuracy. Since our Legal Metrology General Rules 2011 are silent about Load cell accuracy class and minimum specifications, it contributes to import of cheaper load cells, both in quality and price. Indian customs may have exact details of such shipments to India.

Incorporation of Load Cell accuracy class and minimum specifications in General Rules can ward of potential threat to weighing accuracy, safeguard consumer interests and upgrade the quality of products for better acceptability in our own country and across the borders.

It will really be a game changer if LM (DOCA) India, as an OIML issuing authority, incorporates certification of Load cells under R 60 along with other measuring instrument categories like automatic catch weighers under R51, automatic rail weighbridges under R106 and weighing road vehicles in motion under R134. This will give a boost to made in India weighing instruments of world class Quality. As a consequence, we will have better quality products to meet domestic and international demand with wider acceptability. Dependence on imports will reduce and uptick in exports will translate to increased foreign exchange.

OIML certified weighing instruments, irrespective of location of certification and manufacturing, have a better market acceptability amongst OIML member countries and beyond. That means if the market is located across borders, national approvals are granted on the basis of OIML certification with out any further tests. This is one of the main objectives of OIML CS 2018. It implies that for both Model approval and OIML certification the testing applicability is only once. It is a very progressive step towards reducing regulatory costs and increasing positive and effective regulatory impact.

We are sure that Legal Metrology DOCA India, is keen to catalyze, manufacturing of world class products in India, in line with their consistent stand voiced in various seminars and press briefings.

The post Weighing Industry in Market Expansion Mode appeared first on WEMA.

Myths about Annual verification and Stamping of Weighing Equipment

Vijay Bhat — Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:23:34 +0000

We have grown up nursing nearly an unshakable belief that mandatory annual verification of weighing machines is the guarantor of accuracy in weighing results. It is a fool proof enforcement that safeguards consumer interests.

On deeper analysis it appears that the belief is mythical.

Protection of consumer rights is not an annual affair. It needs to be ensured every day and every minute. Then, how can once a year event of verification safeguard such rights.
Diagnosis and treatment of any error / drift in calibration cannot wait for an annual event of verification. It has to be attended to then and there by qualified technicians.
Sustained Accuracy of weighing equipment depends upon daily upkeep and regular maintenance.
Preventive maintenance is an ideal way to ward off incorrect weighments/drifts/break downs and disruptions in operation.
Estimated ratio of Legal Metrology Officers to weighing machines is 1: > 110000
Verification and Stamping is one of the job roles of LMOs beyond a dozen more related to measurements by mass. Besides, they have to enforce Consumer Protection Rules, Package and Commodity Rules, Numeration Rules and much more.
Recognition of resource scarcity gave birth to GATC Rules 2013 involving 3^rd party certification, supposedly to remedy long wait time, capital blockage and operational disruptions.
Government Approved Test Center Rules never took off and kept on adding numbers to its age. It is now >10 years old and continues to be non-functional for want of its rational alignment to the times and the methodology adopted.
Highest degree of weighing precision is required in case of Scientific research labs and manufacture of arms and ammunition for defence use. Verification is exempted for both these activities as per the Legal Metrology Act 2009. Consistent and sustained accuracy on day to day basis is ensured by regular, effective and preventive maintenance.
Therefore, answer lies in presenting self-certified machines conforming to standards laid down in Legal Metrology Rules, to the Regulator as and when they visit for inspection. This will also bring us nearer to some international practices. Enforcement Rules also mandate such inspections to happen frequently.
Focus needs to shift from ritual of annual verification to delivering consistent and sustained accuracy continually. This is the only effective way to serve consumers and safe guard their interests.
Application of one nation one standard for testing of mass measuring machines will further plug the loop holes of discretion, non-uniformity and subjectivity. Regulatory costs will come down considerably besides minimizing the feared potential for rent seeking.
Revenue on account of Govt Fee can be generated when LMO physically inspects the machine in use. Direct online fund transfer to Government account via electronic link will be much in line with our Digital India programme.

The post Myths about Annual verification and Stamping of Weighing Equipment appeared first on WEMA.