Radhakrishnan, J.

Constitutional validity of Rule 9(10)(b) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 is under challenge in these proceedings. Appellants contend that the above mentioned rule violates the fundamental rights guaranteed to them under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore liable to be struck down.

2. The Kerala Abkari Disposal Rules 2002 was enacted by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 18A and 29 of the Abkari Act 1 of 1077. Appellants grievance mainly centers around rules 4(2) and 9(10)(b) of the Rules which, according to them, not only violate Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India but also ultra vires the powers conferred under Section 29 of the Act. For easy reference, we may refer to those provisions at the very outset.

4. (2) The scope so notified under sub-rule (1) above shall be such shops as are retained after abolition of certain existing shops. Grantees of privilege of such retained shops shall undertake to engage the existing workers and such eligible workers of the abolished shops who were registered with the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board as on 31.3.2000 and as are re-deployed to their shops. Grantee of privilege shall also undertake to engage one arrack worker of the abolished Arrack Shops of the State as would be allotted to his shop for rehabilitation, on the basis of district level seniority.

9. (10)(b) One Arrack Worker who has been remaining unemployed since the abolition of Arrack Shops with effect from 1st April 1996 shall be absorbed in the shop as may be decided by Government by observing the District level seniority of such Arrack Workers.

Section 4(2) obliges the grantee of the privilege to undertake to engage existing workers and such eligible workers of the abolished shops who were registered with the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board as on 31.3.2000 and as are redeployed to their shops. Grantee of the privilege shall also undertake to engage one arrack worker of the abolished Arrack Shops of the State as would be allotted to his shop for rehabilitation on the basis of district level seniority. Rule 9(10)(b) also obliges the licensee to absorb one arrack worker who has been remaining unemployed since the abolition of arrack shops with effect from 1.4.1996. On the basis of the above mentioned rules, directions were given to various licensees to absorb one arrack worker in their respective shops. Licensees of the toddy shops are aggrieved by those directions, so also some of the existing toddy workers.

3. The Government thought of rehabilitating arrack workers who were employed in various arrack shops and have issued directions not only to the licensees of toddy shops but to the retail shops of Kerala Beverages Corporation Limited as well. Arrack was being sold in Kerala through licensed retail shops until March 1996. However, from April 1996 onwards, the Government of Kerala had prohibited the sale of arrack which led to closure of large number of arrack shop leading to unemployment of large number of arrack shop workers who were working under the licensed contractors in the retail arrack shops. The Government in the year 1997 gave compensation of Rs.30,000/- to each of the retrenched arrack workers and welfare fund benefits were also granted to those who were in the rolls of the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund. However, the problem of retrenched arrack workers persisted and Government decided to rehabilitates them by providing them with employment in the toddy shops and in retail shops of Kerala State Beverages Corporation Limited. In order to achieve the above objects, the above mentioned Rules were framed. Government have not compelled anybody to employ those workers, but those licensees who avail of the privilege of conducting the toddy shop need only employ them.

4. The apex court in Khoday Distilleries Ltd. V. State of Karnataka and others (1995 (1) SCC 574) held that citizen has no fundamental rig