Delhi High Court stays regulator’s curb on ORS branding in relief for J&J arm
While staying the operation of the FSSAI orders as an interim measure on October 17, the Delhi HC allowed the company to make representation against orders of the FSSAI within a week.
3 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Oct 28, 2025 05:01 PM IST
The company has submitted that the approximate value of their product manufactured or which are in the supply chain, including trade, is in the range of Rs 155-180 crore.
Ruling in favour of Johnson & Johnson subsidiary JNTL Consumer Health, the Delhi High Court has stayed the operation of orders of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) which restrained the use of the term “ORS” in branding beverages.
While staying the operation of the FSSAI orders as an interim measure on October 17, the Delhi HC allowed the company to make representation against orders of the FSSAI within a week.
Justice Sachin Datta, disposing of the plea, recorded the Centre’s submission that the FSSAI orders shall not be given effect till JNTL Consumer Health is given an opportunity of hearing and their representation is decided on. Central government standing counsel Satya Ranjan Swain was representing the Centre through its Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
The company has submitted that the approximate value of their product manufactured or which are in the supply chain, including trade, is in the range of Rs 155-180 crore.
JNTL Consumer Health moved a petition before Delhi HC on October 16, taking objection to two orders by the FSSAI on October 14 and 15 declaring that use of term ‘ORS’ with prefixes or suffixes in product names violates the FSS Act.
Terming the FSSAI orders as “ex facie arbitrary and unreasonable” which have been “issued in a haste,” the companypointed out that the October orders “abruptly withdrew” previous orders by the body, in July 2022 and in February 2024, which had permitted the continued use of the term ORS with prefixes or suffixes in registered trademarks subject to specific disclaimers.
In July 2022 FSSAI had permitted food business operators (FBOs) with valid registered trademarks containing “ORS” to continue manufacturing under their marks till Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks decision, subject to disclaimers on the front of pack.
Story continues below this ad
FBOs without trademarks were directed to discontinue use and were granted six months to exhaust stock. In February 2024, FSSAI further issued a clarificatory order permitting FBOs with registered trademarks to use “ORS” along with a prefix or suffix, subject to a mandatory front-of-pack declaration
In its October 14 order, FSSAI declared a withdrawal of all previous orders permitting use of “ORS” along with brand names with immediate effect. The next day, in another order, it further clarified that even use of “ORS” with prefix or suffix will constitute a violation of the FSS Act and Regulations, declaring such products “misbranded”, and violation of the order being liable for punishment under Sections 52 and 53 of the FSS Act.
The FSSAI had reasoned that “the use of the term “ORS” in the trademarked name or in the naming of any food product otherwise- whether fruit-based, non-carbonated, or ready-to-drink beverages-even when accompanied by a prefix or suffix, constitutes a violation of the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the regulations made thereunder,” and had concluded that “such practices are misleading to consumers by way of false, deceptive, ambiguous, and erroneous names/label declarations”.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
