Sri Venkateshwara Traders vs. The State Of Telangana

Held

The High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The Court noted that the issue raised by the petitioner concerning the ban on chewing/chewable tobacco products was already pending before the Supreme Court in Transfer Case (Civil) No. 1 of 2010. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's directions issued on September 23, 2016, which mandated statutory authorities to comply with regulations framed under Section 92 read with Section 26 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, concerning bans on products like Gutkha and Pan Masala. Therefore, the High Court held that if the petitioner was aggrieved by the Notification dated January 6, 2021, it was for the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court for appropriate orders. The petition was disposed of along with any pending applications.

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Venkateshwara Traders, filed a writ petition challenging a Notification dated January 6, 2021, issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana. This notification banned all chewing/chewable tobacco products. The petitioner contended that this ban was contrary to the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003, and violated constitutional principles. The respondents, including the State of Telangana and the Union of India, argued that the issue raised in the petition was pending before the Supreme Court in Transfer Case (Civil) No. 1 of 2010, which involved all states, including Telangana. They stated that the petitioner should approach the Supreme Court for redressal, referencing prior Supreme Court directions regarding compliance with regulations under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Notification No. 505/FSS-1/2021 dated 06-01-2021, banning all chewing/chewable tobacco products, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and ultra vires the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003, and in violation of Articles 13, 19, and 21 of the Constitution? (Question of law) Petitioner's Arguments: - The notification is contrary to the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003. - The notification violates principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions (Articles 13, 19, and 21). Respondents' Arguments: - The issue is pending before the Supreme Court in Transfer Case (Civil) No. 1 of 2010. - The petitioner should approach the Supreme Court for appropriate orders, given the Supreme Court's directions on September 23, 2016, regarding compliance with regulations under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, pertaining to bans on certain tobacco products.