Food sales by weight ; HC notice to Govt.

Ahmedabad: Gujarat high court on Wednesday issued notice to the state government and the Controller of Legal Metrology and Director of Consumer Affairs in response to a PIL seeking directions to hotels and restaurants to serve food on basis of weight, and not per plate or dish.
The petitioner made an interesting argument, claiming that pizzas should not be sold according to diameter size, but the producer must furnish information about the weight of the pizza and charge accordingly.
A Vadodara-based NGO – Gujarat Khedut Hit Rakshak Samiti filed the PIL demanding strict implementation of the Standard of Weight and Measurement Act. It has urged that hotels and restaurants be made to serve food and beverage in standard measure of 100 gram and 100 ml, and charge customers accordingly.
The petitioner has demanded stopping the practice of charging and serving food per dish or plate, which is not mentioned in any law.
The petitioner stated that all hotels and restaurants serve food per dish and the price mentioned is also per dish, which is not a base unit of sale according to law.
There is no mention of dish or plate as a unit of measurement in law argued the petitioner. How would a consumer know about the quantity of food that is going to be served in one dish, asked the petitioner, adding that price is also fixed per dish and this is against the interest of consumers.
The PIL has stated that serving food per dish is a gross violation of Consumer Protection Act. The government is bound to implement the Standard of Weight and Measurement Act because the present practice in the hotel industry is unfair. While a shopkeeper sells food items to customers in weight, why should there be another yardstick for hotels and restaurants in serving food.
The petitioner told the HC that representations in this regard was made in 2015 bringing to their notice that the base unit of mass is kilogram and hotels and restaurants are legally bound to serve food in gram and litre, but the authorities did not respond.
The court has sought reply from the authorities by June 28.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s