By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

I note that in the Advisory Committee, M.P.s are included, who definitely would playvery important role in tapping and expounding the interests of the various social groupsThe omission to take their advice was indeed fatal and not excusable.For the three reasons given I find that the decision of the Assistant Price Commissionerwas not in accordance with the law and so I declare it null and void At this juncture Iwish to make certain observations about the National Price Commission which fixes themaximum prices for most of the essential goods at national level e.g sugar, rice,corrugated iron sheets etc.The way the members arrive at their decisions is suspect and could readily be a subject ofjudicial review by this court to see if the principles of natural justice are adhered to (e.gare the consumers at large given an opportunity to be heard?) and to see If the procedurelaid down by the statute is scrupulously adhered It may not be long when someenlightened citizens alive to their rights, would wish to challenge the decisions of theNational Price Commission thought public interest litigationOne last point about section 14 (1) of the Regulation of Price Act,1973 which providedthat the Assistant Price Commissioner shall not review the prices for services, more thanonce in any calendar year, save where he is satisfied that special circumstances exist. Ofcourse this provision does not apply to the present case where I have ordered a reviewafter declaring the previous review as void. Be that as it may, with the frequent pricechanges on the market and constant devaluation of our shilling, it is submitted thatspecial circumstances would always be found to exist for the Assistant PriceCommissioner to make a review of the prices as often as possible within a year if fairplay is to be accorded to the consumers and the hoteliers.The applicants did not apply for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of theAssistant Price Commissioner but only applied for an order of mandamus in such mattersgo together. I find the irregularity curable, more so that the applicants were representedby a layman I accordingly quash the decision of the Assistant Price Commissioner of11/11/1986 in which he fixed maximum prices of services at hotels and restaurants andwould order that he reviews the prices afresh in accordance with the law,the restaurantand hotel owners will fix their own prices on the principle of supply and demand. Theapplicants are entitled to the costs o this application which I award them. Orderaccordingly.J.L MWALUSANYAJUDGEMWANZA18.4.198 7The facts in this case are in a nutshell and the question. To be decided are purely legaland require very careful treatment. The plaintiff P.P Mugamba was employed by theNational Pharmaceutical Company but the employment was terminated in 1991. He137