IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.220 of 2008 VIJAY KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the appellant: Mr. R.B.Mahto, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the respondents : Mr.R. K.Choubey, GP – VII Mr. Prashant Kumar Choubey JC to GP – VI --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 10th September, 2008 We heard the counsel for the appellant. 2. In our view, the appeal is devoid of any substance and does not deserve to be admitted for more than one reason. For one, there is no challenge to the legality and correctness of the order dated 12th September, 2000 (Annexure -1) issued by the Department of Health, Government of Bihar, notifying the government decision to stop issuance of fresh licence for manufacture of OXYTOCIN INJECTION B.P.(Vet). For two, the legality and correctness of the order dated 12th September, 2000, was directly put in issue by one Sanjay Kumar in a writ petition being CWJC. No.1133 of 2001 and this court did not quash the said order. For three, and more importantly, from the order dated 31st October, 2 2002, passed by the single judge,disposing of writ petition in the case of Sanjay Kumar, a reference is made to the letter dated 27th August, 1996 sent by the Director General of Health services, Government of India, New Delhi, to all State Drug Controllers/Zonal and Sub Zonal Offices, putting restrictions on the manufacture and marketing and use of the OXYTOCIN INJECTION. 3. The senior counsel for the appellant heavily relied upon Annexures – 4 dated 3rd June, 2005, Annexure -5 dated 5th July, 2005 and Annexure -8 dated 12th December, 2005 in support of his contention that the Government of India has taken decision that the manufacture of OXYTOCIN INJECTION may continue. 4. We are afraid, none of the documents, viz., Annexures – 4 , 5 & 8, supports the contention of the senior counsel for the appellant. Annexure – 4 is addressed to the Commissioner, Department of Animal Husbandry and Diarying, Ministry of Agriculture by the Directorate of Health Services, wherein advice has been sought as to whether the use of said injection is required in the veterinary practice or should it be discontinued. In response thereto, the Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, wrote to the Drug Controller General of India, Directorate General of Health Services, that OXYTOCIN is one of the vital drug in veterinary practice and it cannot be discontinued at present from its use in veterinary science. 3 Despite this communication, the earlier letter dated 27th August,1996 sent by the Director General of Health Services to all state drug controllers has not been withdrawn. 5. Annexure -8 is a communication by the Drugs Controller General (I), Directorate General of Health Services, to the Deputy Drugs Controller (I) Central Drugs Standar Control Organisation (East Zone), Kolkata to prepare para-wise comments in consultation with Central Government Standing Counsel, Patna to answer the writ petition being CWJC No. 11367 of 2005; Simplex Pharmaceuticals, Patna vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. We fail to understand the relevance of this communication. 6. We are satisfied that Letter Patent Appeal has no merit and is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed. This , however, will not preclude the appellant in apprising the State government of the developments that have taken place subsequent to the order dated 12th September, 2000. We also observe that in case the said facts are brought to the notice of the State government, they will consider the same in accordance with law. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/