Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.23 seconds)Secretary, Ministry Of Chemicals & ... vs M/S. Cipla Ltd. & Ors on 1 August, 2003
Insofar as the judgment relied on by the learned counsel
for the petitioner in the case of MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS AND
FERTILIZERS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA v. CILPA LIMITED -
(2003) 7 SCC 1 is concerned, there can be no qualm about the
principle enunciated by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment.
28
The Apex Court also holds that it is axiomatic that the contents of
the policy document cannot be read and interpreted as statutory
provisions and further holds that breach of a policy decision by itself
is not a ground to invalidate the delegated legislation. The facts
obtaining before the Apex Court in Cipla Limited was inclusion of
certain bulk drugs in the First Scheduled to the Drugs Price Control
Order. Analysing the policy and the role of the Government as a
delegate of legislative power the Apex Court summarises the issue
at paragraph-9 of the said judgment to hold that while classifying
the drugs for the purpose of price control it is not open to the
Government to flout or debilitate set norms which it professed to
follow in the interest of transparency and objectivity. The facts
obtaining in the case at hand are entirely different from what fell for
consideration before the Apex Court. Therefore, the said judgment
is inapplicable to the facts of the case. The judgment rendered by
the High Court of Delhi would not lend any assistance to the
petitioner, as the judgment rendered by the High Court of Bombay
referred to supra was considering this very price control policy.
Therefore, the said judgment would lend complete assistance to the
respondent/Union of India. Hence, none of the judgments relied on
29
by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would merit any
further consideration for they being not applicable to the facts of
the case at hand.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Defence of India Act, 1962
Section 3 in The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
The Essential Commodities Act, 1955
Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited vs The State Of Haryana & Others on 19 March, 2013
11. On a coalesce of the afore-quoted regulatory orders
notified by Government of India what would unmistakably emerge
is that Government of India is empowered to promulgate a pricing
policy and regulate prices of certain drugs which are even of non-
formulation as formulated drugs are already in the Schedule to the
Order. Non-formulated drug is what is sought to be controlled now.
The key feature of the policy as noted hereinabove is 'essentiality'.
Therefore, the drugs that are sought to be controlled are essential
drugs, essential for combating cancer. The reasons for
promulgation of the said policy are found in the Notification itself.
The notification records that there were eight lakhs cancer deaths in
India in 2018 alone and number of new cases are estimated to be
on the rise; 50% of cancer patients avail private sector facilities and
out of pocket expenses in the health care including the cancer care
is about 65%; one major factor that contributed to high drug prices
in India were the unreasonably high trade margins. An expert
committee of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare was
constituted to examine the issue of manufacturers selling certain
19
drugs to the consumers at about 900 per cent more than the
regular price of a drug. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana in
the case of RANBAXY LABORATORY LIMITED V. STATE OF
HARYANA observed that there was no legal provision in force to
save the consumer from naked fleecing of consumers by drug
manufacturers. All these factors were looked into and 43 anti
cancer medicines were brought under price control. Therefore, it is
not a case where the price control policy that comes about is either
unreasonable or arbitrary for this Court to entertain a challenge to
the said policy that too at the hands of a retailer and not the
manufacturer. Even otherwise it is such regulatory policy of keeping
of price that is sought to be questioned before this court seeking a
judicial review of the said policy. Whether this Court can by way of
judicial review obliterate or even tinker with the policy is what
needs to be considered.
Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance vs Union Of India . on 24 October, 2016
The Division Bench in INDIAN PHARMACEUTICAL ALLIANCE
AND ANOTHER v. UNION OF INDIA3 holds as follows:
1