The Taluk Supply Officer, Trichur had issued notices during July, 1998 and the recipients have filed these Original Petitions challenging the same, a specimen copy of which is produced as Ext.P3 in O.P.No.14891 of 1998. He had brought it to the attention of the petitioners, who are hoteliers, an order (No.F1.2396/98) of the district Collector, whereby he had classified the hotels, and had fixed the prices of normal food items. The Officer found that excess charges were being levied. For instance, in the case of first petitioner in O.P.No.14720 of 1998, the price of tea exhibited was Rs.3/- whereas the prescribed price was Rs.2.50 and therefore, excess of fifty paise was being collected from the general public. Some other food items also were named and it had been warned that this is illegal. The direction was that price lists published are to be appropriately streamlined with the general directions, and in case of failure, petitioners were liable to be prosecuted. Although individual petitioners, as also their Association had objected to the above proposal pointing out that this was unauthorized, since they were apprehending prosecution proceedings, original petitions had come to be filed. Interim orders had been passed by this court staying all coercive steps.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, and the District Supply Officers is the signatory as authorised to swear to the affidavit. According to him, the Original Petitions were misconceived, and were liable to be rejected. It had been pointed out by the said officer that Ext.P3 was not unauthorized as pointed out, and as a matter off fact, the minutes of the food Advisory committee showed that such restrictions were validly incorporated as a condition for operating the establishments. Advertence was made to repost made by the Sub Committee. The hotels were classified to four groups, depending upon the seating capacity, investment and the general ambience that had been found available. The representatives of the Hotel Owners Association were also there in the committee, and the proposals became binding on them. It is further submitted that the decision was taken in public interest. Complaints were forthcoming from several individuals and organizations about the levy of extra price, in spite of general notifications, and it was why the Administration had sprung to action.

3. Further, it had been claimed that it was the duty of the Government to maintain fair price. The authorities had been compelled to take steps noticing the exorbitant prices charged for food stuffs sold. Thee Food Advisory-cum-Vigilance Committee had been constituted for Thrissur District of which the District supply officer is the Convenor and the District Collector the Chairman. The committee consisted of members from various walks of life, including representatives from elected bodies and the Sub Committee had come to a decision taking notice of all relevant materials. Mostly, it was unobjectionable. This was as per Government directives.

4. The government Pleader had attempted to sustain the order on the strength of the Kerala Food Stuffs (display of prices by catering establishments) Order, 1977. It required the caterers to publish the price of food articles sold by them. Such orders were issued under the authority of Essential Commodities Act. Ext.P3 was valid and one made in the right step.

5. In spite of the above submission, I find it difficult to accept the stand that any of these are enabling provisions for imposing restriction in the matter of price of food articles sold by an eating house. It may be in public interest to restrict the price, but such powers, if at all, are circumscribed by the requirement to recognize the fundamental rights of a person to carry on an industry or business to his liking. The District Authorities might be getting complaints about the prices levied by the establishments, but only in authorized matters, it may be possible for t