AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J
Petitioner is the distributor of ‘N95 Mask’ manufactured by a concern called ‘Vijay Overseas’, in the brand name ‘AICURE’.
It is stated by the petitioner that the said product is one conforming to the Standards prescribed by the International Organisation for Standardisation
(ISO) namely, ISO:9001:2015. The first respondent has issued Ext.P1 order, in exercise of the powers under the Kerala Essential Articles Control
Act, 1986, fixing the maximum retail price for various products including ‘N95 Mask’. In terms of Ext.P1 order, the maximum retail price fixed
for ‘N95 Mask’ conforming to IS 9473:2002 is Rs.26/-. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that in the light of Ext.P1 order, the
second respondent is not permitting the retailers of the petitioner to sell the product distributed by her for any amount exceeding Rs.26/-. According to
the petitioner, the product distributed by her is a superior one, conforming not only to the Standard IS 9473:2002, but also to ISO:9001:2015, and as
such, the second respondent is not empowered to interdict the sale of the product for an amount exceeding the amount fixed in terms of Ext.P1 order.
The petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to the respondents to permit her and her retailers to sell the product for amounts exceeding the amount fixed
in terms of Ext.P1 order.
A statement has been filed by the second respondent.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
The petitioner does not dispute the authority of the State Government to issue an order in the nature of Ext.P1, in exercise of the power under the
Kerala Essential Articles Control Act, 1986. The question therefore, is only as to whether the retailers of the petitioner are entitled to sell the product
distributed by the petitioner for any amount exceeding the amount fixed by the Government in Ext.P1 order. As noted, the petitioner maintains that the
product distributed by her is one conforming to the Standard IS:9473:2002. She, however, contends that in addition, the product is conforming to
ISO:9001:2015 as well. It is on that premise that the petitioner takes the stand that the retailers of the petitioner are entitled to sell the product for an
amount exceeding the amount fixed in terms of Ext.P1 order. There is no pleading in the writ petition as to the parameters to be achieved for claiming
certification in terms of IS:9473:2002. There is also no pleading in the writ petition as to the parameters to be achieved for claiming certification in
terms of the ISO. The petitioner relies on Ext.P2 report of analysis issued by a private laboratory to contend that the product distributed by her is
superior to a product conforming to IS:9473:2002. Even assuming that Ext.P2 is a genuine certificate, the same would only show that the product
distributed by the petitioner is one conforming to the Standard IS:9473:2002 in relation to some of the parameters. Ext.P2 does not certify that the
product distributed by the petitioner is one conforming to the standards prescribed by the ISO. There is also nothing on record to indicate that the
product of the petitioner is superior to a product conforming to IS:9473:2002.
The writ petition, in the circumstances, is devoid of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.