M/S.Sri Venkateshwara General Agencies vs. The State Of Telangana, And 8 Others

Held

The High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The Court noted that the issue raised by the petitioner was already pending before the Supreme Court in Transfer Case (Civil) No. 1 of 2010. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's directions dated September 23, 2016, which mandated statutory authorities to comply with regulations framed under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, concerning bans on specific products. Given that the Supreme Court was seized of the matter, the High Court found it appropriate to direct the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court for necessary orders if they were aggrieved by the impugned notification. The Court disposed of the writ petition and pending applications without costs.

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Venkateshwara General Agencies, filed a writ petition challenging Notification No. 505/FSS-1/2021, dated January 6, 2021, issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana. This notification banned all chewing/chervable 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 provisions. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare the notification illegal and unconstitutional, and to prevent interference with their trade in such products. Interim applications were also filed seeking suspension of the notification and a direction to respondents not to interfere with their business.

Key Issues

1. Whether Notification No. 505/FSS-1/2021, dated January 6, 2021, issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana, banning all chewing/chervable 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, in violation of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned notification was contrary to the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, and violated fundamental rights. They sought to set aside the notification and prevent interference with their business. Respondents' Contention: The State's counsel submitted that the issue raised in the writ petition was already 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 appropriate orders, especially in light of the Supreme Court's directions on September 23, 2016, regarding compliance with regulations framed under Section 92 read with Section 26 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, pertaining to bans on certain products.