Subba Rao Kiranam And General Stores vs. The State Of Telangana And 7 Others

Facts

Multiple petitioners, traders dealing in tobacco products, filed writ petitions before the Telangana High Court. They challenged Notification No. 501/FSS-I/2022 dated January 7, 2022, issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana. The petitioners contended that this notification was 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. They also argued it violated principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners sought to set aside the notification and prevent respondents from interfering with their trade. They further stated that despite a Supreme Court stay on a similar notification, local authorities were harassing them.

Held

The High Court noted that a similar notification had been challenged before the Supreme Court in W.P. No. 541 of 2021, which was dismissed by a judgment and order dated May 15, 2021. An appeal against that dismissal was pending before the Supreme Court. Crucially, the Supreme Court had, in the interim, stayed the operation of the impugned notification by an order dated March 31, 2022. The High Court found it inappropriate to pass a parallel order when the entire matter was sub judice before the Supreme Court, whose orders are binding on all courts and authorities. Therefore, the High Court directed the respondents to comply with the Supreme Court's stay order dated March 31, 2022. The Court also stated that if any petitioner felt the stay order had been violated, they were at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with the law. No specific finding was made on the validity of the notification itself, as the matter was pending before the Supreme Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether Notification No. 501/FSS-I/2022 dated January 7, 2022, issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, 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? 2. Whether the said notification violates the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that the impugned notification was beyond the scope of the relevant Act and violated fundamental rights. They also raised a grievance that despite a Supreme Court stay on a similar notification, local police authorities were harassing them and interfering with their businesses. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents. However, the presence of various government departments as respondents indicates their role in enforcing the notification.