IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 OP.No. 19614 of 2000(I) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ S.D.PHARMACY, PALACE ROAD, ALAPPUZHA, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DRUGS CONTROLLER, OFFICE OF THE DRUGS CONTROLLER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.SANDESH RAJA FOR R1TOR3 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.32750/2000 IN OP. NO.19614/2000 DISMISSED 21.08.2008 SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE L-2 LICENCE ALONG WITH CHALAN ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE S.P. VI LICENCE ALONG WITH CHALAN ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE S.P. VI LICENCE ALONG WITH CHALAN ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DL4/18373/91/DC DT. 22.11.1991 ISSUED BY THE DRUGS CONTROLLER, TVM. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 26.6.95. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DT. 24.2.1997. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 22.5.93. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS. EXT.P9:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G.O.(RT) 599/89/TD DT. 6.12.89 . EXT.P10:- COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 18.1.94 . /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE tss K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,J. ============================== O.P. NO. 19614 OF 2000 ============================ DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a reputed manufacturer of Ayurvedic medicines. It is running 29 branches and there are 595 authorised agencies for the sale of ayurvedic medicines manufactured by it. This writ petition is filed challenging Rule 11 (1)(b)(ii)of the Kerala Spirituous Preparations (Control)Rules, 1969(hereinafter called “the Rules”). 2. The petitioner is having necessary licence to manufacture various arishtas and asavas. Its manufacturing plant is managed by qualified persons. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding the stipulation contained in the aforementioned Rule that its branches should be manned by qualified registered ayurvedic medical practitioners. The agencies of the petitioner also should have such qualified hands. The relevant portion of the said rule reads as follows: “11. Licences for Sale:- (1) Licences for the sale of spirituous preparations shall be of the following descriptions namely - xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx (b) Retail sale:- Licence in Form SP VII for the retail sale shall be issued only- xx xx xx xx (ii) for sale of any homoeopathic medicinal preparations or any preparation coming under the indigenous system of medicine, to a registered medical practitioner or to those recognised by the Government of Kerala or the Central Government as competent authorities for dispensing these preparations to the public or to the holder of a licence under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.” 3. The learned Government Pleader,upon instruction, submitted that the Excise Commissioner has issued two circulars dated 25-6-2000 and 8-8-2005, which exempted reputed ayurvedic pharmacies from the rigour of the above Rule. The petitioner is one of those manufacturers. In view of the above submission, the writ petition is closed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner. If it is decided by the Government or Excise Commissioner to enforce the above provision in future against the petitioner also, it will be free to challenge Rule 11, if so advised, again. The original petition is dismissed. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE ks.