2009 Supreme(Bom) 784

High Court of Judicature at Bombay
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. MAJMUDAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M. SAVANT
Britannia Industries Limited
Versus
Union of India, The Government Pleader & Others
WRIT PETITION NO.685 OF 2001
Decided on : 03-07-2009

Headnote:Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 - Schedule III - Constitution of India, Article 19(1)(g) - Reasonable restrictions - Such restrictions can be placed by the Government. - Reasonable restrictions can be placed by the Government on the right to do business. Considering the object of the said Act the Legislature in its wisdom has mandated certain commodities to be pre-packed in a standard package. However, as stated herein-above there is not impediment on a manufacturer or distributor to pre-pack the commodity which he intends to give free of cost in a separate package or pack it in a package of a standard quantify, mentioned in the Schedule. The requirement to pack particular commodity in a standard package, in Court’s view, does not, in any manner, violate Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

       Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 - Schedule III - Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, Rules 23(1), 4 and 5 - Constitution of India, Article 14 - Constitutional validity of Rule 5 - Rule 5 neither arbitrary nor violative of Article 14 - If the said Rules and IIIrd Schedule are not strictly adhered to, it is possible that the consumers may be taken for a ride in terms of the quantity or price at which the commodity is being sold - Provisions of the Act and the rule can be invoked even in respect of the commodity which is given free of cost. - Rule 5 mandates that specified commodities are to be packed and sold only in the standard package and the said standard quantities are specified in relation to a particular commodity in the IIIrd Schedule to the said Act. In so far as biscuits are concerned, Schedule inter alia sets out the standard quantity in which the said biscuits can be packed. Considering the object of the said Act viz. Consumers protection, it is obligatory on the part of the manufacturer/distributor to sell the commodity in the standard package mentioned in the Third Schedule, merely because the manufacturer/distributor wants to give 15% or 20% of the commodity free of costs it would not be open for him to pack it with the standard quantity commodity which is being sold for a price. Since the object of the Act is the consumers protection, the said Rules and the Third Schedule would have to be strictly adhere to. If the said Rules and the Third Schedule are not strictly adhered to, it is possible that in a given case, the consumers may be taken for a ride in terms of the quantity or price at which the commodity is being soled. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the provisions of the Act and Rules, cannot be invoked in respect of the commodity which is given free of cost, therefore, cannot be accepted. If the manufacturer or distributor is interested in giving something free of cost, it would be open for such manufacturer or distributor to pack the said quantity in a separate package along with standard package or pack it in a standard quantity package. Court therefore finds merit in the submission of the counsel for the respondents that the Rules would have to be strictly adhered to. Court does not find anything arbitrary in the said Rule 5. The said rule in fact ensures that the consumer stands to get for whatever he has paid for. Rule 5 mandating that the commodities are to be prepacked in standard packages, in Court’s view, has nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the said Act, namely the protection of the interest of the consumer.

       The rule postulates that the commodity in question has to be prepacked in a standard package mentioned in the Third Schedule. It does not prohibit the manufacturer or distributor to pack the commodity which is given free of cost in a separate package or the commodity which is given free of cost along with the commodity of standard quantity results in a package of standard quantity mentioned in the Schedule, and therefore, in Court’s view, it cannot be said that the said rule is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.