Federation Of South Indian v. Union Of India,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 13.02.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH Federation of South Indian Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association Rep. by its General Secretary S.Lakshmi Narayanan, Block-D1, Baid Metha Complex, No.183, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.
... Petitioner Vs 1.Union of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 011.
2.The Director of Drug Control, Tamil Nadu, DMS Complex, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 006.
3.The Drugs Controller, O/o. The State Drugs Control, General Hospital Junction, Tiruvananthapuram-1.
4.The Director General [Drugs and Copy Right] Drug Control Administration, Vengalrao Nagar, Hyderabad.
5.The Drugs Controller, Karnataka State, Palace Road, Bangalore-1, Karnataka.
6.The Drugs Controller/The Licensing Authority, Drugs Administration, Puducherry.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in connection with the impugned notification of the 1st responent No.X 11011/1/2011/DFOC dated 01.10.2012 and quash the said notification dated 01.10.2012. For Petitioner : Mr.Ramesh Venkatachalapathy For Respondents : Mr.Rajesh Vivekanandan Deputy Solicitor General - R1 Mr.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader - R2 No appearance - R3 & R5 Service not completed - R4 Mrs.Sharada Vivek Additional Government Pleader (P) - R6
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed by the Federation of South Indian Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. Mr.Ramesh Venkatachalapathy,
learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Federation is in itself, not in existence as it had become defunct.
2. That apart, the challenge by the petitioner is to a Notification issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare dated 01.10.2012. One of the grounds of challenge is that the Notification is contrary to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Hoechst Pharmaceuticals V. C.V.S.Mani ((1983) ILD Delhi 548).
3. Mr.Rajesh Vivekanandan, learned Deputy Solicitor General for R1 would however point out that the aforesaid decision is in no way connected to the present cause of action. The present Notification only casts a burden upon the pharmaceutical companies to, at the time of issuance of licence, detail only the composition of the drug and not the brand name or their trade mark. This was not the issue dealt with by the Delhi High Court in the aforesaid decision.
4. I see no reason to delve into the merits of the matter, seeing as this Writ Petition has been pending since 2012 and there is no interim protection that has been granted to the petitioner. It is the case of the respondents that the pharma companies which are members of the Federation have complied with the requirements under the Notification and that the Notification has been fully implemented. I thus see no reason to upset the apple cart at this juncture.
5. For the reasons aforesaid, this Writ Petition has no merits as on date and is dismissed. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.
13.02.2023 Sl Index : Yes / No Speaking Order To 1.Union of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 011.
2.The Director of Drug Control, Tamil Nadu, DMS Complex, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 006.
3.The Drugs Controller, O/o. The State Drugs Control, General Hospital Junction, Tiruvananthapuram-1.
4.The Director General [Drugs and Copy Right] Drug Control Administration, Vengalrao Nagar, Hyderabad.
5.The Drugs Controller, Karnataka State, Palace Road, Bangalore-1, Karnataka.
6.The Drugs Controller/The Licensing Authority, Drugs Administration, Puducherry.
Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
sl 13.02.2023