B.P. RAY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The prayer in the writ petition is as follows.

(a) for an order and declaration of this Hon'ble court that the provisions of Standards and Weights and Measures 1976 and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 do not apply to the petitioner;

(b) for an order and declaration of this Hon'ble Court that Section 33 of the Standards and Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 is ultra vires the Constitution of India and is void and liable to be struck down;

(c) for a writ of certiorari, or a writ in the nature of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction of this Hon'ble Court calling for the records of the case and after perusing the same, to quash and set aside all actions initiated against the petitioner including Ext. P4 issued by the 4th respondent.

(d) for a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction of this Hon'ble Court restraining the respondents by themselves, their officers, servants and agents, from taking any action whatsoever against the petitioner's hotels pursuant to or in implementation of any of the provisions of the Standards and Weights and Measures Act, 1976, the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 including by launching and/or initiating any legal proceedings, civil or criminal whatsoever against the petitioner's hotels or the Directors or employees.

(e) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the petitioner, the respondents be restrained by an order and injunction of this Hon'ble court from taking any action whatsoever against the petitioner, its hotels pursuant to or in implementation of any of the provisions of the Standards and Weights and Measures Act, 1976, the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 including by way of launching and/or initiating any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, whatsoever against the petitioner, its hotels or the Directors, officers or employees.

The short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the star Hotels run by the petitioner can charge a price in excess of the maximum retail price (MRP) from their customers. The petitioner which is a joint venture company between the Government of Kerala and the Tata Group runs a chain of five star hotels in the State of Kerala. The 4th respondent Legal Metrology Inspector had inspected Hotel Taj Residency on 4.1.1999 and seized 24 bottles of pepsi cola vide Ext. P5 seizure memo alleging violation of the (herein after referred to as the Act) and the standard of Weights and Measures (Package Commodities) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The specific allegation against the petitioner was that Pepsi Cola which had a maximum retail price of Rs. 8/- was being sold for Rs. 35/- thereby violating the provisions contained in the Act and the Rules.

2. Section 39 of the Act and Rules 4 and 6 deal with the declaration to be affixed on package commodities. Rule 2(i) defines pre-packed commodity and Rule 2(r) defines retail sale price and refers to maximum retail price to be printed on the packages.

3. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that the Act and the Rules can have no application to the Hotel industry. The petitioner submits that what is being sold is not only a product but also an experience including the luxury ambience of the hotel, exclusive service and various other facilities and amenities for which an amount in excess of the maximum retail price is collected from the customer. The petitioner is fortified in this regard by a judgment of the Delhi High Court in The Federation of Hotels and Restaurants Association of India and Others Vs.