Should the Government control the prices of food, clothing & shelter?

For example land prices are priced at Rs.10 crores
An ordinary two bed room flat is sold for Rs.100 crores!!!
Rent for an office Rs.50 lakhs per month.
Rent for a residential apartment is Rs.5 lakh per month;

Yes. The Government should control the prices of food, clothing and shelter.

No. What about small business owners who want to control the price of what they sell?

No the government should not control the prices of food, clothing, and shelter. If they do, it wouldn't be fair. Not only would farmers, stores, and real estate companies lose, but the entire lazzie farie thing would be mucked up. Here in America we have free trade (which applies to anything for sale), and I beleive that free trade is the way to go.
P.S. - What country has crores? Never heard of them and I thought I was pretty well versed in all of that.

no,if they'll do there will going to have no privacy to sellers,and it will limit the growth and development of individuals.

First you can control to ask questions like this

Big farmers who could hold on to their stocks would have benefited from the higher prices offered later, but the bulk of the peasantry sold their produce to traders at prices below the Rs.700 offered three weeks too late by the government. If the FCI had been given the same leeway as private trade, then the present dismal record of low procurement could have been avoided. Shockingly, the government offered the Indian farmer almost Rs.100 less than what it paid foreign traders for wheat it has imported at Rs.789.20 a quintal. The cornering of the stock by private trade has permitted wheat hoarding, which has pushed market prices up by Rs.5-6 a kg. Thus private trade made a killing both ways, by buying the bulk of wheat at prices only slightly higher than the MSP and by manipulating market prices to two-thirds more than what they spent on buying the grain from farmers.

NO NOT AT ALL BECAUSE SMALL SCALE INDUSTRY OWNER5RS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THEIR DAILY RAW MATERIAL THEY REQUIRE

No they should not. A 1/4 acre in the San Francisco Bay area goes for around $500,000. Why? Nice year round weather, but mainly supply and demand. Try and get that amount for land in say Alaska or the Mohave Desert ,etc. We have oil refineries in the SF area and have to pay higher prices for fuel than if they truck it 500 miles. Why? I guess they figure we can afford it if we live here. So thats an example why the government DOES need to take some control. But they have a way of making things worse- so less gov---the better
If you want them to control you, go to prison!

No, anytime price controls are put into effect they either cause a scarcity or a surplus of the item that is affected. Government price supports caused a surplus production of butter & cheese & attempts to regulate the price of gasoline caused a shortage. Typically the market will regulate the price of an item, unless one group has a monopoly on said item. Attempts to control the price of rent have always led to a shortage of rent space.
If rental prices are too low to make building more housing profitable, then too few new dwellings will be built & if they are too high too few will rent them.

*NO !!!! it will open the doors for more corruption !!!!!

Yes,the basic needs of human are food,clothing and shelter. But to control the prices by Govt.is not proper solution on it. when our Nation will become truly a developed Nation and each citizen is capable to get sufficient earning that will fulfills all the basic requirements for living better life.

If the government tries to impose direct price controls it creates black markets shortages, long lines, and generally messes up the economy. Rent controls are noted for having bad outcomes because landlords stop doing repairs on rent controlled buildings..However governments can and do influence prices by the rules and regulations imposed, and by giving some economic activities subsidies, and taxing others.

Already everything have gone high,now cannot stop,then it will become recession/

I'm not familiar with the currencies you use, but I can tell you that in most circumstances, government control of prices is a terrible idea.

Any forced deviation from market equilibrium prices that is not accomplished via the open market (i.e. by adding supply or buying up supply) will ALWAYS create shortages or surpluses.

If governments want to help poor people, they should just give them money. Its the most efficient way to help them. Any government 'initiative' will almost by design deliver less benefit than if the full cost were simply distributed.

Of course, this strategy is somewhat popular, because it doesn't allow politicians to talk about all the little things they've done, and because poor people might use the money to buy more beer instead of a larger apartment.

The prices are a result of market forces; demand and supply. However prices of basic needs like housing, clothing cannot be compared to , say, Mercedes.

Such basic economic factors to a large extent are affected by macro-economic fiscal, monetary policies; through which government controls them. Government should refrain from direct control unless there are extra-economical forces like cartels...

It is the rule of demand and supply. If our population would not have risen at such a fast pace we could have avoided this situation. Government can definitely fix the prices , but how it can be monitored. When there will be scarcity of any of these things your best friend will come and pay exorbitant price to take your share and deprive you from such facilities. Therefore, there is a need of boosting our moral and take pledge not to purchase any thing at higher price , then only traders will understand the situation. There should be social boycott of black marketers, hoarders ,and our own corrupt leaders.