Firecrackers for sale, but no price tags in sight — the hidden chaos of Diwali trade

Shimla, Oct 20,

As Diwali approaches across Himachal Pradesh, the sight of roadside stalls selling firecrackers and the sound of sparklers being lit are familiar scenes. Yet beneath the celebratory glow lies a less visible reality: the business of crackers remains one of the least transparent markets in our state, with scant consumer-protection measures around pricing or quality, even though the time-window for usage and sale is tightly regulated.

In the hill towns and valley markets, the pattern is familiar. A shopper who heads out a day or two before the festival often ends up paying a significantly higher price for the same kind of packet that someone buys on the festival evening itself — the last minute buyer benefits from “clearance” style discounts. But the buyer has no way of knowing what the “correct” price is, because this is not publicly displayed. In most stalls, there is no printed price list, no brand labelling that is easily identifiable, and no standardised indication of quality. The consumer simply buys what is available and negotiable.

What adds to the intrigue is that while safety and use-timing are regulated, pricing and disclosure of quality are not. In Himachal Pradesh, for example, the state has restricted bursting of crackers to just two hours — from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. — and only “green crackers” have been permitted in recent years. Similarly, in the city of Shimla the administration has announced that sale of firecrackers is allowed only at designated sites and only with a valid licence. Yet these controls do not extend to meaningful transparency for consumers regarding how much the same type of firecracker should cost, or whether the item carries a reputable brand or conforms to safety standards beyond the minimal.

A recent survey of markets in Kangra and Una districts found that many traders claimed they had “no knowledge” about the ban on non-green crackers and admitted to selling whatever stock they could procure, because green alternatives were unavailable. That trade dynamic underscores how the regulatory system is primarily handling the “where” and “when” of sales and use — but not the “what” in terms of product quality or “how much” in terms of price. For the consumer, this means a market shaped by timing and vendor discretion rather than fixed public norms.

The consequences are two-fold. Economically, the lack of publicly displayed price lists means buyers are at a disadvantage: without an MRP or standardised benchmark, there is no way to assess whether they are paying a fair price or being exploited by time-pressure. Anecdotal reports point to last-minute markdowns, but there is little systematic data. On the quality side, the absence of clear branding, batch identification or widespread consumer awareness of “green” vs standard crackers means risks in safety and pollution remain. Even where “green crackers” have been mandated, enforcement of genuine supply remains weak: one trader noted that although the ban on conventional crackers was imposed in 2020, green ones “were not available in the market”.

Why does this matter in Himachal? The state’s geography makes the pollution and safety stakes higher — narrow lanes, dense built-up areas, proximity of shops to homes, and tourist influx increase both fire-risk and environmental sensitivity. The official limitation of bursting fireworks to just a two-hour window (8–10 p.m.) is a recognition of that risk. But safety-timing alone cannot substitute for transparency in product or price.

An added complexity is vendor licensing. While the state provides for application of licence for sales of crackers (via the e-District portal) the fact remains that once a stall is licensed and timed, the vendor is still free to set prices and select stock — with minimal consumer-facing monitoring of whether the product is compliant or fairly marked. Thus the regulatory emphasis remains on “authorised sale” rather than “fair sale”.

What might improve things? There are several practical reform steps that would not burden sellers but would uplift consumer fairness: requiring that each authorised stall display a printed price list of common cracker items with unit prices; mandating minimal labelling on each packet sold (manufacturer, date of manufacture/batch code, green-cracker approval where applicable); encouraging spot audits by consumer-affairs or weights-and-measures along with fire-safety checks; educating buyers about the significance of timing of sale (early-bird vs last-minute) and urging them to compare prices rather than paying reflexively.

For residents of Himachal’s towns and villages, the message is clear: while the festive sparkle of Diwali is welcome, the business of crackers still operates in a semi-shadow market of timing-based markups and opaque quality claims. Until pricing and product transparency become part of the regulatory story — not just safety time-windows and licensing — buyers will continue to see themselves at a disadvantage.

When you next head out to buy your sparklers or flower-pots, consider pausing: check the vendor’s licence, ask to see a price list, compare what others are paying, and ask whether what you are buying is a “green cracker” and why it costs what it does. In a market where the only consistent transparency is when you can light, the what and how much still await daylight.