Gita Mittal, J.-The Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. - petitioner No.1 has brought the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the provisions of the h Standard of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 do not apply to it inter alia for the reason that it is at par to a hotel and a restaurant. A further declaration is prayed to the effect that the action of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum VI (New Delhi) considering application No. CC/462/06 filed by respondent a No.3 issuing notice and directing the petitioners to file written statement is illegal, null and void.

2. The factual matrix giving rise to this writ petition is in a narrow conspectus. Sh. Harish Tripathi, respondent No.3 herein is stated to be a member of the Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. - petitioner No.1 herein. The grievance of the respondent No.3 was that the cost of overheads of the club was being recovered from the members by the monthly subscription of Rs. 200/- per month and that the charge of service charges levelled on credit sales by the jumbo shop of the club as well as sale of any item above the printed maximum retail price by the club was in contravention of the rules. The respondent No.3 was aggrieved by the action of the petitioner No. 1 in supplying food al\d beverages at rates above the maximum retail price of the commodities. According to the respondent No.3, the petitioner No.1 charges a monthly subscription of significant amount from its members which according to him would be sufficient for meeting expenses including salaries of staff and maintenance etc of the club making a complaint that the petitioner No.1 had charged more than the maximum retail price on a bottle of coca-cola and on credit sales of all items, the respondent No.3 firstly made representations dated 27th February and 28th April, 2004 to the respondent No. 1. Upon failure to receive relief, the respondent No.3 filed an application dated 12th June, 2006 before the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum VI (New Delhi) making a complaint against the said actions of the petitioners which was registered as case No. CC/462/06. The respondent No.3 prayed that the petitioners be restrained from continuing with the practice c~ charging in excess of the MRP written on the cold drink bottles.

3. On this complaint, the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum issued notice under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 requiring the petitioner No. 1 to appear before the Forum in person or through a duly authorised agent. The petitioner No.1 was further directed to place its written statement of the case before the Forum in the hearing fixed for 7th August, 2006. Aggrieved by the action and order of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in entertaining the complaint and issuing notice, the present writ petition has been filed seeking the aforenoticed declarations.

4. The writ petition came up for hearing on 24th July, 2006 when an interim order prohibiting the respondents from enforcing the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 against the petitioner in respect of loose food and beverages article was granted.

5. The petitioner contends that the price charged by the clubs, hotels and restaurants depends upon the quality of level of establishment, location and the facilities provided by it. In addition to the sale of food, drink items for consumption other facilities and services such as air conditioning of the dining room and other areas, interior decoration, hiring of trained staff, etc are also provided. Sale of such commodities by them is incidental to the real service rendered by them. The elected body of the club fixes the rate of articles to be served in the restaurants and parties of the club. The members are taxed over and above the MRP values of articles only to the extent that expenses of the club, as salaries of staff, maintenance, etc. can be met from the membership fee and the income derived by offering and providing services to the members