S. RAJENDRA BABU, J. ( 1 ) IN these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution the petitioners have sought for a declaration that S. 39 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act and Rules 1 (3), 2 (s), 4, 6 and 23 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) are void and unenforceable. They have also sought for certain other incidental reliefs. ( 2 ) THE petitioners claim to be engaged in the business of selling various commodities who have factories in various parts of the country. Various goods are manufactured by them with the intention of selling them throughout India. The grounds upon which the various provisions of the Act and the Rules are challenged are as follows : (I) That S. 39 of the Act being applicable to only inter-State trade and commerce has no application to sales effected by the petitioners which are inter-State transactions. (ii) Rules 6 and 23 are unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental rights under Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution and they are also violative of the guarantee envisaged in Art. 301 of the Constitution. (iii) That the Act seeks to regulate only inter-State sales of commodities but the Rules seek to govern intra-State sales as well and therefore the same are beyond the ambit of the Act and hence are ultra vires the provisions thereof. (iv) That the definition of 'sale price' in Rule 2 (s) of the rules is ultra vires S. 39 of the Act inasmuch as it takes within its sweep intra-State sales as well. So far as the said definition is made applicable to intra-State sales, the same is ultra vires of the rule making power. (v) That the rules as framed in Rr. 2 (s), 6 and 23 are unreasonable and not practicable to comply with at all inasmuch as the same are arbitrary because of the failure of the Govt. to take into consideration the fluctuation in the prices, the cost of freight being different from place to place, the local taxes being different and the Central sales tax being dependant upon the rate of local taxes and the upward and downward trends in the pricing structure. to take into consideration the fluctuation in the prices, the cost of freight being different from place to place, the local taxes being different and the Central sales tax being dependant upon the rate of local taxes and the upward and downward trends in the pricing structure. The said rules having been framed without taking note of these facts is an artificial definition which is beyond the rule making power of the State. ( 3 ) THE concept of consumerism has assumed great significance in recent times in the developing countries. Almost always the consumer movements are poorly financed, usually unpaid and often not very impressive in their presentation of facts and conclusions, they nevertheless are able to encounter a generally sympathetic public with confidence and the movement has slowly and steadily gathered momentum. From the business community consumer movement has met with the fiercest opposition, a posture which still exists to some extent even today. Even so, the demand for urgent reforms became irresistible at making products safer and curbing the most outrageous exploitation of part-time buyers by full-time sellers, and dealing with a host of questionable marketing practices that were successful only because of consumer guillibility or economic illiteracy. The consumer protection was never a serious concern of even governments which had a duty under the Constitution for the welfare of the people as a whole. The principle recognised by law having been "buyer beware or caveat emptor", rules and regulations affecting the industry, trade and commerce having been modelled on that basis the governments all over the world appear to be more interested in earning revenues than in protecting the interests of the consumers. A consumer is taken for granted and almost always ignored. In this background several laws aimed at protecting the consumers were enacted, one of them being the Act. A consumer is taken for granted and almost always ignored. In this background several laws aimed at protecting the consumers were enacted, one of them being the Act. ( 4 ) THE statement of objects and reasons of the Bill culminating in the Act clearly indicate that pursuant to the adoption of international system of units of weights and measures and being a party to the General Conference of Weights and Measures and the International Organisation of Legal Metrology, India had to revise the standards of weights and measures with a view to providing a coherent scheme for measurements having regard to the rapid advance made in the fields of science and technology and to evolve a practical system of units of weights and measures, suitable for adoption for all the signatories thereof. Thereafter a committee was constituted by the government to consider what changes were required to be made in the 1956 Act in order to give effect to the recommendations made by the aforesaid international organisation. It is stated in the objects and reasons that the bill further provides for consumer protection as well. I quote:"the Bill further provides for consumer protection in respect of packaged commodities by providing, in pursuance of the recommendations of the International Organisation of Legal Metrology, for the proper indication on the package of net quantity by weight, measures or number, the identity of the commodity contained therein, name of the manufacturer, and what is very important, the price of the package. It is also proposed that commodities commonly used by people should be packed in rationalised standard quantities by weight, measure or number, so as to facilitate the purchase and comparison of price by the people. Further, indication of date of manufacture and date of expiry would also be marked for appropriate products. A further provision for consumer protection is the approval of models of weights, measures and weighing and measuring instruments, which is recommended by the International Organisation of Legal Metrology, draft law. The scientific evaluation of the performance accuracy and dependability of weights, measures etc. , would enable the consumer to buy his requirements with greater confidence about accuracy and also give industries the facility to use more accurate measuring instruments in their production control and enable the scientists to measure accurately the quantities involved in their researches. All these benefits will contribute to national development. , would enable the consumer to buy his requirements with greater confidence about accuracy and also give industries the facility to use more accurate measuring instruments in their production control and enable the scientists to measure accurately the quantities involved in their researches. All these benefits will contribute to national development. " ( 5 ) IN this background we may examine the scheme of the Act. The Act intends to establish standards of weights and measures to regulate inter-State trade and commerce in weights and measures and other goods which are sold and distributed in weights and measures or numbers and provided with the matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act is divided into eight parts. While Part I relates to the preamble, the definitions, the applicability of the Act overriding the provisions of other laws, its title, extent and commencement, Part VIII deals with certain miscellaneous provisions, such as, survey and statistics, provisions relating to conversion of weights and measures and such allied matters. Part II deals with the establishment of standards of weights and measures. In Part III the machinery for implementing the provisions of the Act is provided. Part IV deals with inter State trade or commerce in weight, measure and other goods. Part V covers import and export of weights and measures and Part VII speaks of establishment of a training institute and training curriculum. We are principally in these petitions concerned with Part IV of the Act. ( 6 ) THE Act is, of course, as the preamble states is enacted for the purpose of establishment of standards of weights and measures, to regulate inter-State trade or commerce in weights, measures and other goods and to provide certain incidental matters thereto. Nothing turns on the preamble by itself. Chapter IV of Part IV refers to commodities in packaged form intended to be sold or distributed in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. Section 31 which falls in this Part makes it clear that Part IV is to apply to inter-State transactions only. Nothing turns on the preamble by itself. Chapter IV of Part IV refers to commodities in packaged form intended to be sold or distributed in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. Section 31 which falls in this Part makes it clear that Part IV is to apply to inter-State transactions only. Section 39 provides that no person shall make, manufacture, pack, sell or cause to be packed or sold, or distribute, deliver, or cause to be distributed or delivered, or offer, expose or possess for sale any commodity in packaged form to which "this Part applies" unless such package bears thereon or on a label securely attached thereto a definite, plain and conspicuous declaration, made in the prescribed manner of - among other things, the sale price of the package. Hence these provisions make it clear that they fall within Entries 42 and 50 of List I of Schedule VII to the Constitution. No argument is advanced that these provisions offend any fundamental rights or are contrary to any other provision of the Constitution. Hence contention that Section 39 is invalid cannot stand. ( 7 ) SECTION 31 of the Act makes it clear that Part IV which includes in it S. 31 is applicable to goods which are, or are intended to be sold, distributed, delivered or otherwise transferred by weight, measure or number in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. We are not concerned with other provisions of the said section. An analysis of S. 31 (b) will make it clear that it falls into two parts; firstly, where goods are sold, distributed or delivered or otherwise transferred in the course of inter State trade or commerce, and secondly to the goods intended to be so dealt with for the purposes aforesaid. So, it covers two situations: where the goods are in fact or actually dealt with in the manner provided in S. 31 (b) or intended to be dealt with in the manner provided therein. In the present cases, some of averments of the manufacturers who are petitioners in a set of cases clearly indicate that they are manufacturing goods which are intended to be sold, distributed or delivered or otherwise transferred in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. In the present cases, some of averments of the manufacturers who are petitioners in a set of cases clearly indicate that they are manufacturing goods which are intended to be sold, distributed or delivered or otherwise transferred in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. In the case of these manufacturers in order to say whether S. 39 of the Act is or is not applicable to a transaction when goods had been sold or dealt with by a manufacturer inside or outside a State but the whole transaction relating to that particular commodity or goods will have to be examined and that can be done only on ascertaining the facts and the details of the transactions. It cannot be categorically said at this stage of the proceedings that S. 39 is not applicable to sales effected by the petitioners and needs further examination. Therefore, the first contention raised by the petitioners cannot be held in favour of the petitioners at this stage of the proceedings. ( 8 ) SECTION 83 of the Act provides for making rules which empower the Central Government carrying out the provisions of the Act. It is the contention of the petitioners that the entire Act itself is intended to cover inter-State transactions and not intra-State transactions. In fact, the Parliament has enacted another Act, the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 (Act 54 of 1985) (hereinafter referred to as the 'enforcement Act') and S. 2 thereof which clearly states that that Act shall not apply to any inter-State trade or commerce in any weight or measure or any other goods which are sold, delivered or distributed by weight, measure or number. Section 33 of the said Act makes provisions for the application of the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder with regard to commodities in packaged form, mutatis mutandis, which are distributed, sold or kept, offered or exposed for sale in the State as if the provisions of the Act were enacted under the provisions of the "enforcement Act" and the State Government is empowered to make rules not inconsistent with that Act or rules made thereunder to regulate the packaging of any commodity to be sold or distributed, within the State, in packaged form, or to regulate the sale or distribution of any commodity in packaged form. Therefore, whatever rules may have been made under S. 83 they will be applicable not only in respect of inter-State sales but also to intra-State sales are applicable when the Enforcement Act is brought into force. In that view, the argument advanced that the Rules under the Act are not applicable to intra-State sales, at any rate after the coming into force of the provisions of the Enforcement Act, loses all significance. But, during the interregnum between date of the Act and the coming into force of the Enforcement Act, the matter will have to be examined as to whether those rules can be made applicable to transactions with reference to which these petitions are filed. As stated earlier the whole object and purpose of the Act has been to enact a law not only for the purpose of setting out standards in weights and measures but also to make provisions for the protection of consumers. One of the most important rights of a consumer today, among other rights, is to be fully informed of the product and also to choose from a sufficient number of alternatives to ensure competitive prices and quality and in that regard if a rule is made as to the manner of declaration of contents of a package and specification of the unit, weight, measure or number along with the maximum sale price shall be declared on the package, it cannot be said that it is beyond the scope of the Act. Moreover, the Act does not merely cover the goods dealt with only by manufacturers but also distributors or dealers wholesale and retail. It covers the cases of all or each of such persons and comprehensive provisions have been made in that regard. Whether any particular commodity has been brought or kept for sale in the course of an intra-State transaction or an inter-State transaction will be a factor which will have to be examined with reference to facts of each case, but that by itself does not deprive the power conferred upon the rule making authority to frame a rule as to the manner of the contents of the declaration on the package and specification and retail price thereof. The rule covers not only the manner of declaration but also specification of a retail price. The rule covers not only the manner of declaration but also specification of a retail price. Therefore, the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners that the Act regulates only inter-State sales but the Rules having been made to govern intra-State sales also and the same are beyond the ambit of the Act cannot be accepted. ( 9 ) IT is next contended that the definition 'sale price' in R. 2 (s) of the Rules is ultra vires of S. 39 of the Act. Section 39 of the Act requires disclosing of the sale price on the package and S. 83 (r) is also similarly worded. The Act itself has not defined the meaning of the expression 'sale Price'. The question that arises for consideration is whether it is permissible for the delegated authority in making the subordinate legislation, to give a definition under the Act with reference to an expression not defined in the Act. In the relevant Rules definition of 'sale price' reads as follows: " 2 (s) "sale price", in relation to any commodity in packaged form means any one of the following prices namely : (I) price inclusive of freight but exclusive of local taxes, and where such price is mentioned on the package, there shall be printed on the package the words "max. price. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . local taxes extra"; (ii) retail sale price, and where such price is mentioned on the package there shall be printed on the package the words "max. retail price. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "; explanation I : Each of the prices specified in this clause shall be inclusive of all other taxes other than those specified in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and shall also be inclusive of commissions payable to wholesale dealer and retail dealer and all other charges including advertisement, delivery packing, forwarding and the like; explanation II: For the purpose of sub-clause (i), "local taxes" include :- (i) Sales tax; (ii) Central Sales Tax, where leviable and actually paid by the retail dealer under any law in force in a particular area". It is argued with reference to the earlier rules that it is not permissible for the rule making authority to have artificially defined the concept of 'sale price' as the same does not take note of the fluctuation in prices, the cost of freight being different from place to place, the local taxes being different and the Central taxes being dependant on the local taxes and is beyond the rule making power of the authority. The manufacturers, distributors, the wholesale and retail dealers all study the market, its fluctuations, conduct surveys, gather data not only about the consumer potential of the goods but also the manner in which the price structure will have to be made inclusive of freight charges and the taxes that become payable thereof. It is, therefore, certainly possible for all these persons referred to earlier to fix the maximum price of the goods. By this enactment the price of a commodity is not controlled. What is done is to call upon these persons to disclose the maximum price above which the goods will not be sold. ( 10 ) ). The concept of sale price has been subject-matter of judicial interpretation, at any rate, in matters arising under the Sale of Goods Act, the Transfer of Property Act and the Sales Tax legislations. Many a time this expression is stated to mean what ultimately a purchaser pays for getting the goods to his hands which may include everything that goes into the making of the consideration, such as, the value of the goods at which the dealer sells, the freight charges, commission payable, the taxes that may be payable on the same including excise duty. Some times, some of these components going to make sale price are excluded. Therefore, the expression 'sale price' is susceptible of more than one meaning and it may include everything in one sense as stated earlier or it may not be everything depending on the context and circumstances in which it is used. It is a term which has no fixed connotation or meaning but is capable of varied meanings including or excluding the freight charges or taxes or commission payable depending upon the context of the transaction. It is a term which has no fixed connotation or meaning but is capable of varied meanings including or excluding the freight charges or taxes or commission payable depending upon the context of the transaction. It cannot, therefore, be said that it is not competent to the authority delegated with the powers to make rules to define the sale price by including in its ambit all those elements that are mentioned in the definition at Rule 2 (s) of the Rules. Viewed thus, the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners that the sale price as defined is unreasonable and not practicable to comply with and beyond the rule making power cannot be accepted at all and the contentions in that regard will have to be rejected. ( 11 ) THE contention that Rules 6 and 23 of the Rules are unreasonable restriction on the fundamental rights under Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution and they are also violative of the guarantee envisaged in Art. 301 of the Constitution also cannot be accepted at all. As stated earlier, when the law has been enacted not only for the purpose of standardisation in weights and measures but also for the purpose of protection of consumers, merely by asking the manufacturers, distributors, dealers wholesale or retail to display the sale price by making the rule cannot in any way be said to be a restriction on anyone's fundamental rights nor does it interfere with the course of inter-State trade or commerce. Therefore, the contention in this behalf is plainly without any substance and deserves to be rejected. ( 12 ) ). The contention that the Act is intended to control the activities of retail traders as ultimately consumer has to be protected only in his hands and therefore the requirement under the Rules obligating the manufacturer to disclose the maximum price also surpasses my comprehension because a reference to the provisions of the Act will reveal that the obligations are not merely upon the retail traders but also on all persons dealing with goods starting from the stage of manufacture right up to the stage of sale to a consumer. Therefore, at all levels this compliance of the provisions will have to be made. In the circumstances, the argument that there cannot be any requirement on the manufacturers to disclose the maximum price also cannot be accepted. Therefore, at all levels this compliance of the provisions will have to be made. In the circumstances, the argument that there cannot be any requirement on the manufacturers to disclose the maximum price also cannot be accepted. ( 13 ) SOME of the petitioners have urged that the Act will come in conflict with the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act inasmuch as S. 33 (1) (f) thereof provides for barring transactions in which agreements could be entered into by which goods can be sold in retail for the price displayed thereof. A careful consideration of the provisions of that Act will disclose that what is contained in Section 33 is only registration of agreements in that regard and if an agreement is shown to be made in compliance with the Act in question, I do not understand as to how the same would come in conflict with the provisions of the Act. Moreover, it is unnecessary to discuss this aspect of the matter, inasmuch as the scope of the two enactments being entirely different and the context in which those provisions are made are not attracted as to the requirement of the petitioners to display or exhibit the maximum price at which the goods can be sold. 13a. I am fortified in my view by the decisions of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Andhra Pradesh State Trading Federation v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Writ Petn. 8457 of 1983 rendered by the Division Bench of that High Court on 10th of February 1988 upholding the validity of the Act and the Rules. To the similar effect is another decision of a learned single Judge of the same High Court in sundaram Clayton Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Writ Petn. 7765 of 1983 decided on 19th of October 1987. ( 14 ) WHEN the enactment in question refers principally to transactions, intended or actual, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce and if the petitioners being under the mistaken impression that their transactions are purely intra-State not controlled by the statute in question have become liable under the Act for omissions and Commission or non-observance of the Act and now that they are all conforming to the requirements of the Act, it will be in fitness of things for the Government to examine the feasibility of withdrawing or droping the prosecution that may have been launched. ( 15 ) ). And subject to these observations, in the result, these petitions are dismissed. Rule discharged. Petitions dismissed. --- *** --- .