Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The petitioner is the sole proprietor of M/s Anil Enterprises, which has been duly licenced by the Licensing Authority viz Durgs Control Department, Delhi wherein, it has been licenced to sell, stock or exhibit or offer for sale or distribute by wholesale drugs under various schedules/forms prescribed under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act'). Vide notification dated 23.05.2013, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in exercise of its power under Section 26A of the Act suspended the manufacture for sale, sale and distribution etc of Dextropropoxyphene and formulations containing the said substance for human use (P-4). On account of an error in describing Dextropropoxyphene as Dextyropropoxyphene, a fresh notification was issued as corrigendum on 30.08.2013 (P-5). Thereafter, the petitioner-firm received the consignments of Spasmo Proxyvon containing Dextropropoxyphene till 31.05.2013. The petitioner firm sold the said product Spasmo Proxyvon to distributors till 11.06.2013 (P-7). Vide communication dated 10.06.2013 (P-8) (received by petitioner's firm on 12.06.2013) M/s Wockhardt informed the product Spasmo Proxyvon and Proxyvon manufactured by it containing Dextropropoxyphene are liable to be recalled in compliance with Government notification suspending manufacture/sale.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case, the alleged recovery had been effected on 02.10.2013 from the brother of Chemist based at Karnala. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner's firm never received any stock of Spasmo Proxyvon and or Proxyvon after 31.05.2013 and it never sold any stock of Spasmo Proxyvon and Proxyvon after 11.06.2013.
The recovery had not been effected from the petitioner after 11.06.2013 and further what steps the State Drug Controller had taken for imposing a ban of sales of drugs pursuant to notification dated 23.05.2013 (P-4) is to be investigated.