JUDGMENT

P. B. SAWANT, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a bunch of appeals, special leave petitions and writ petitions. The first group consists of CA Nos. 4708-12 of 1989, 4718-27 of 1989, WP (C) Nos. 666, 667, 693, 694, 774, and 910 of 1990 wherein constitutional validity of the (0 Kamataka Excise (Distillery and Warehouse) (Amendment) Rules, 1989, (ii) Kamataka Excise (Manufacture of Wine from Grapes) (Amendment) Rules, 1989, (iii) Karnataka Excise (Brewery) (Amendment) Rules, 1989, (iv) Kamataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) (Amendment) Rules, 1989 and (v) Kamataka Excise (Bottling of Liquor) (Amendment) Rules, 1989 was unsuccessfully challenged by various parties before the Kamataka High court, inter alia on the ground that the Rules in question affected adversely the fundamental right of the parties to carry on trade or business in liquor and that the said Rules were violative of Articles 14, 19 (1 (g), 47, 300-A, 301, and 304 of the Constitution of India. A bench of three learned Judges of this court which heard this group of matters has referred them to the Constitution bench.

( 2 ) THE second group consists of CA Nos. 6043-50, 6051 and 6052 of 1993. These appeals arise out of