© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Delhi High Court Wednesday refused Johnson and Johnson subsidiary JNTL Consumer Health (India) Pvt Ltd interim relief to clear its stock of ORSL-labelled beverages while orally remarking that it cannot permit the same as it is a “serious public health concern”.
The Centre, through the regulatory body Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), issued orders on October 14, 15 and again a reasoned order on October 30, prohibiting sale and manufacture of ORS-labelled products that do not adhere to the WHO standards of ORS. In a fresh petition, taken up before a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, JNTL Consumer Health (India) Pvt Ltd is seeking a stay on the operation and implementation of the three FSSAI orders as an interim measure and that they be allowed to exhaust their stock, which according to senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the firm, amounts to Rs 100 crore at the moment.
Senior advocate Rohatgi submitted, “We have stopped manufacturing. About 50% of the goods are in the market, we can’t get that back. We are willing to rebrand. But I don’t want to lose Rs 100 crores worth of stock. It will be unfair to treat this as an adulterated drug. All we want is that what is in the market is not recalled.” Additionally, the consumer health firm is challenging the constitutional validity of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Recall Procedure) Regulations-2017, regulation number 5, which deals with food recall procedure and pins the responsibility for such recall on the food business operator. It is also seeking the three FSSAI orders from October be quashed.
The Centre vehemently opposed JNTL Consumer Health (India)’s plea Wednesday with ASG Chetan Sharma saying the company had challenged the FSSAI’s October 14 and 15 orders in an earlier round of litigation and another manufacturer (Dr Reddy’s Laboratory) challenged the regulation as well, and thus the plea won’t be maintainable, for agitating the same issue a second time. The court disagreed, noting challenge by one manufacturer to a regulation does not bar another manufacturer from challenging the same when the issue has remained undecided, and also added that the manufacturers had not challenged the October 30 order either.
The court was, however, firm that it will not grant an interim relief to JNTL to exhaust its stock.
