The deadline runs; the answer doesn’t

Letter from the table
RC/RT/2026/T.6 · 15 September 2026

To the Red Tape Council,

I support the Small Business Impact Standard. I want to explain why from a situation that was not technically a permit to open, but still shows what happens when a small business cannot get a clear answer from an administrative process.

On 6 July, our team reached ten workers. Under the Maharashtra Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 2017, an establishment with ten or more workers has to apply for registration within 60 days of commencement. Establishments with fewer than ten workers have a different requirement: they submit an intimation. I knew we had crossed the threshold, and I did not want to treat a filing deadline as optional.

I submitted the application through the state labour department’s online service on 8 July. I kept the acknowledgement and the uploaded documents. The application did not produce a registration certificate. I checked the portal repeatedly and could not tell from what I could see whether the file was waiting for review, whether something needed correction, or when I could expect a decision. I tried to follow up through the available channels. That took time away from work, but it did not give me a reliable service date.

There is a difference between a slow process and an invisible one. If an office tells me that a document is missing, I can provide it. If it gives a realistic date, I can plan around it. When the only evidence I have is an acknowledgement and a

pending application, I cannot tell another party whether the matter is settled or still open.

That uncertainty had a cashflow effect. A larger customer asked us for current registration documentation as part of its onboarding. The work was worth ₹72,000. The customer did not accuse us of doing anything wrong; it needed the document before it could complete its process. We had filed on time, but we did not yet have the certificate to supply. Meanwhile, the people we had hired were still due their wages. One week of payroll for the new team members was about ₹18,000. That is a real amount for a small operation to carry while waiting for an administrative outcome.

I am not asking the Council to claim that every delay is unlawful, or that every application should be approved. An officer may need to check an application. A file may be incomplete. But the applicant should be able to see what is happening and what to do next. In my case, the uncertainty—not a clear refusal—was the difficult part.

The Council’s proposed Small Business Impact Standard asks for a small-business impact test, a one-stop digital process, published service times and a “silence is consent” deadline for permits. I support all four parts, with one important distinction: the Maharashtra Shops and Establishments registration process I experienced is a statutory filing, not a licence that gives every business permission to operate. The Council should describe that distinction accurately. The same practical principles still matter: a single route for filing and follow-up, a visible status, clear correction instructions, and a published time for an answer.

For permissions that really do require a decision, a silence-is-consent deadline could prevent an application from sitting indefinitely. It should be designed with safeguards for public safety and for applicants who have not supplied required material. But a safeguard should not mean that an applicant gets no status, no stated reason for delay and no expected date. Where automatic consent is not appropriate, the authority should at least have to issue a reasoned update before the deadline.

A small-business impact test should ask more than whether a new rule is necessary. It should ask how many separate steps the business must complete, whether the information has already been given to another public office, what happens if a service time is missed, and how a business can keep paying people while a decision is pending. Those questions would connect the Red Tape Council’s work directly to the Cashflow Council’s concerns. A form that is technically online can still impose a cost in staff hours, travel, delayed work and wages.

I would like the Days to Open survey to record both the date an application is filed and the date a usable decision or certificate arrives. It should also ask whether the applicant could see the status, what extra steps were required, and whether the delay held up a contract, hiring or payment. Counting only the number of days to submit a form would miss the part that affected me.