JUDGMENT : Antony Dominic, J. This Appeal is filed by the additional 3rd respondent in W.P.(C)No.13468 of 2011. The said Writ Petition was filed by the first respondent herein seeking to challenge Exts.P5 and P6 whereby the Government prevented them from increasing the price of milk by Rs.5/- per litre pursuant to a resolution passed by the Co-operative Society. By the impugned judgment the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition on the premise that the Co-operative Societies Act, governing the Statute, did not empower the Government to restrain the petitioner from increasing the selling price of milk based upon its resolution. It is this judgment that is questioned by the 3rd respondent, who got herself impleaded in the Writ Petition. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and counsel for respondents 2 and 3. The learned counsel for the additional respondents were also heard. 3. The essential question is whether the Government is empowered to control the price of milk sold by the first respondent. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, under Entry 34 of List III of VIIth Schedule to the Constitution of India, Government is entitled to legislate on price control. According to him, so far no legislation has been made and in the absence of a legislation, the Government is entitled to issue instructions which should be binding on all authorities. To strengthen the above contention the learned counsel relied on the decision reported in Gulabrao Keshavrao Patil and Others v. State of Gujarat and Others [ 1996 (2) SCC 26 ]. Therefore, according to him, the impugned action of the Government should be sustained. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent contended that there is no statutory provision whatsoever entitling the Government to interfere with the power of the first respondent in fixing the price of the milk sold by them. It is true that under Entry 34 of List III of the VIIth Schedule to the Constitution of India, the State and Central Governments are empowered to legislate on price control. However, the admitted position today is that there is no legislation brought into force in exercise of the aforesaid source of power conferred on the legislature. It is true that under Entry 34 of List III of the VIIth Schedule to the Constitution of India, the State and Central Governments are empowered to legislate on price control. However, the admitted position today is that there is no legislation brought into force in exercise of the aforesaid source of power conferred on the legislature. It is true, in such circumstances, the Government can issue orders and instructions under the Constitutional provisions or under the Business Rules framed by the concerned legislature. It cannot be argued that Exts.P5 and P6 are issued in exercise of such powers. If that be so, these orders cannot be supported relying on the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant. In other words the resultant position is that there is no statutory or other powers available to the Government enabling it to control the price of milk marketed by the first respondent. If that be so, the conclusion to the above effect arrived at by the learned Single Judge cannot be interfered with. The Writ Appeal lacks substance and is therefore dismissed.