The consumer affairs department has said to its advisory to state governments that there cannot be two different maximum retail prices (MRPs) for the same packaged item within a state.
It has advised that all packaged items, including beverages, cannot be sold at two different MRPs in shops, multiplexes or airports.
A senior official fromt he department said, "There is no dual MRP provision in the packaged commodity rules and hence state governments must ensure that no one sells packaged items at different prices within a region. In case of different MRPs, the lowest one will be treated as the actual price."
He said while there were orders from the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCD- RC) that no one could sell bottled water at different MRPs.
The department is also writing to state governments to carry out verification of net content of bread at manufacturing units. The step is being taken after the department received complaints of how the actual weight of bread was less in many cases against what the manufacturers declared.
The official also said, "As per our norms, the net weight difference can be 4.5 grams. But there were complaints that bread makers were not complying with the norms. The states are empowered to inspect, verify and take action. We expect the manufacturers to comply with the specified rules and ensure consumers get products of the right weight for which they are paying."
Pune airport officials have taken an action against a food outlet for violating MRP rules. The officials have shut down the outlet and terminated its agreement after a passenger complaint that food at the outlet is being sold at a price higher than the printed maximum retail price (MRP).
Spandan Agrawal, a passenger who filed the complaint, tweeted, "Was at Pune airport early morning today. A food counter names 'Sal Balaji food and beverages' was selling jelly toffee at above MRP and when I said why is MRP struck off, he had a simple answer "Sir, we will sell it obviously at a high price. It's an airport"."
After Agrawal’s complaint, the licence of the vendor was terminated and kiosk was removed from the airport.
An airport official said, "All the food outlets have been given strict instructions. Earlier, there were complaints about the quality of food being served at some of the outlets. Now, the number of outlets has increased. They should be following all the regulations and in no case can a packed product be sold at a price higher than the printed MRP."
A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra issued notice to the Department of Consumer Affairs, Controller of Weights and Measures, and others on an appeal filed by the FHRAI seeking to setting aside of the division bench of the Delhi High Court’s February order.
The HC bench while disposing of the appeals filed by the government had kept the question of law, which was decided by its single judge, open for adjudication in any fresh proceedings under the new law. It had also held that the single judge’s March 2007 order “shall not be a precedent” in any case even if the concerned provisions of the old (repealed law) and the new law were identical, reported FE.
The HC bench’s order had nullified the binding effect of Justice Vikramjit Sen’s 2007 order that ruled that hotels and restaurants in the Capital can sell bottled mineral water over and above the MRP to customers who visit them and enjoy their other services facilities.
Sen had observed that “the customer does not enter a hotel or a restaurant to make a simple purchase of the bottled water. It may well be that a client will order nothing beyond a bottle of water or a beverage, but his direct purpose in doing so would clearly be to enjoy the ambience available therein and to ordering of any article for consumption.”
Justice Vikramjit Sen’s 2007 order ruled that Delhi’s hotels and restaurants can sell bottled mineral water over and above the MRP.
The FHRAI told the apex court that the HC bench’s decision had “grossly undermined the sanctity and integrity of the judicial/adjudicatory process”. It said that irreparable harm and injury will be caused to its members if the Centre is permitted to commence proceedings under the Legal Metrology Act 2009 without allowing its members to rely on 2007 judgement.
Senior counsel Harish Salve argued that charging prices for mineral water in excess of MRP during the service does neither violate the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act/the Packaged Commodities Rules nor the new law. “There is an element of service, so MRP can’t apply,” he said.
Copyright © 2009 - 2025 Restaurant India.