Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, companies engaged in the manufacture, supply, and distribution of pan masala containing tobacco (gutka) and pan masala not containing tobacco, filed writ petitions challenging the validity of the Maharashtra government's ban on such products. The petitioners claimed to have licences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, now replaced by the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The court heard the learned counsel on the question of interim relief. The petitioners' factories were situated outside the State of Maharashtra. The court, after hearing the parties, granted interim relief by allowing the petitioners to continue their manufacturing activities outside the State pending the final hearing of the petitions. The court held that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case and the balance of convenience was in their favour. Rule was made returnable in the first week of July 2013.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Trade and Commerce - Interim Relief - Petitioners challenged the validity of the Maharashtra ban on gutka and pan masala containing tobacco - Court granted interim relief allowing petitioners to continue manufacturing outside the State pending final hearing - Held that petitioners made out a prima facie case and balance of convenience was in their favour (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to interim relief against the enforcement of the Maharashtra ban on manufacture, sale, and distribution of gutka and pan masala containing tobacco, pending final hearing of the writ petitions.
Final Decision
Rule granted, returnable in the first week of July 2013. Interim relief granted: petitioners allowed to continue manufacturing outside the State of Maharashtra pending final hearing.
Law Points
- Interim relief
- prima facie case
- balance of convenience
- territorial jurisdiction
- Food Safety and Standards Act
- 2006
- Prevention of Food Adulteration Act
- 1954
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (09) 36
Writ Petition No.1631 of 2012 and connected matters
Mohit S. Shah, C.J., N.M. Jamdar, J.
Mr.Milind Sathe, Mr.N.H. Seervai, Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Mr.Ravi Kadam, Mr.Aspi Chinoy, Mr.Chirag Balsara, Mr.Prakash Shah, Mr.D.J. Khambata, Mr.Kevic Setalvad
M/s. Dhariwal Industries Limited and another, Ghodawat Pan Masala Products (I) Pvt.Ltd., Rajnandini Foods Pvt.Ltd., SDD Agencies Pvt.Ltd., M/s. Hira Enterprises, Rajat Industries Private Limited, M/s. MSS Food Processors
The State of Maharashtra and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging the validity of the Maharashtra government's ban on manufacture, sale, and distribution of gutka and pan masala containing tobacco.
Remedy Sought
Interim relief against enforcement of the ban pending final hearing.
Filing Reason
The petitioners, manufacturers of pan masala and gutka, challenged the ban imposed by the State of Maharashtra.
Issues
Whether the petitioners are entitled to interim relief against the enforcement of the Maharashtra ban on gutka and pan masala containing tobacco pending final hearing.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that they have licences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and their factories are situated outside Maharashtra, so the ban should not apply to them.
Ratio Decidendi
The petitioners made out a prima facie case and the balance of convenience was in their favour, warranting interim relief allowing them to continue manufacturing outside the State pending final hearing.
Judgment Excerpts
Rule, returnable in the first week of July 2013.
Heard the learned counsel on the question of interim relief.
The writ petitioners are companies engaged in the business of manufacture, supply and distribution of pan masala containing tobacco (known as gutka) and pan masala not containing tobacco.
Procedural History
The writ petitions were filed in 2012 challenging the Maharashtra ban on gutka. On 15 September 2012, the court heard the parties on interim relief and granted rule, allowing the petitioners to continue manufacturing outside the State pending final hearing.
Acts & Sections
- Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954:
- Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006:
