New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, founded by yoga guru Ramdev, to file an affidavit stating whether advertisements for its 14 products, whose manufacturing licenses were initially suspended but later restored, have been withdrawn.
On April 15, the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority issued an order suspending the manufacturing licenses of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy.
In a new development, the state licensing authority has filed an affidavit in the high court stating that the suspension order has been canceled following a report by a high-level committee that examined the complaints of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the wake of the dispute. .He said that on May 17, the operation of the April 15 order was suspended and then the suspension order was canceled.
However, during the hearing, a bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta took note of Patanjali's affidavit dated May 16 in which the company claimed that the sale of these 14 products was stopped in light of the suspension order dated April 15.
The affidavit stated that the company has also taken steps to remove the related advertisements from its verified official social media accounts/handles. "Defendant number five (Patanjali Ayurved Ltd) is required to file an affidavit stating, among other things, whether has acceded to the request made to social media intermediaries and whether the advertisements of 14 products have been removed/removed," the court said.
The top court, which was hearing a plea filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) alleging a defamation campaign by Patanjali against the Covid vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine, asked the company to file its affidavit in a period of two weeks.
The court asked senior advocate P S Patwalia, representing the IMA, whether they had done due diligence and verified whether these advertisements were withdrawn after Patanjali filed the affidavit in May. During the hearing, a lawyer appearing for one of the petitioners said that the Center should investigate the matter related to misleading advertisements as quickly as possible.
"This is having a huge impact on the online industry," he said, adding: "The industry should not suffer. That is not the intent of the (court's) orders."
Justice Kohli said, "The intention is not to cause any harassment to anyone. The intention is only to focus on particular sectors and aspects." One of the advocates said that he was appearing for a radio association and they have 10-second long advertisements .
"We are also of the view that the industry should not suffer in any way. The approach of this court has already been highlighted in previous judgments and does not need repetition," the court said.
He said the issue should be discussed by authorities at the highest level. "We do not want there to be layers of approval so that anything that needs to be shortened and simplified is done," the court said.
Noting that the scope of the petition has been expanded in terms of its order passed on May 7, the court asked lawyer Shadan Farasat to assist the court as amicus curiae in the matter.
He said the amicus will help the court in collating the data provided by the state authorities, including the Center and other authorities, to save time and focus on the issues highlighted earlier by the court. "May we request you to convene a meeting so that all the stakeholders and senior officials of your department can brainstorm?" the court told Additional Solicitor General (ASG) K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre.
Nataraj said that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has held high-level meetings with various stakeholders with a view to resolving the issues and difficulties expressed by them.
"He (ASG) maintains that such meetings should be taken further... to rationalize the issues and point out the difficulties faced by the intervenors and the manner in which they can be resolved," the court noted. It asked the ministry to continue the "churning of ideas" and hold further meetings in this direction and submit an affidavit with its recommendations within three weeks.
The court said the affidavits filed by various state licensing authorities in the matter would be given to the amicus for perusal and to enable him to assist the court by pointing out whether there was any non-compliance on the part of any of the state authorities in terms of the orders. approved by the court.
The court has posted the matter for further hearing on July 30. On May 14, the high court had reserved its order on the contempt notice issued to yoga guru Ramdev, his assistant Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the case of misleading advertisements.
Patanjali Ayurved Ltd had assured the high court on November 21 last year that it would not violate any laws, especially those relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it.
It had also assured the court that "no casual statement asserting medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine shall be disclosed to the media in any manner." The apex court had said that Patanjali Ayurved Ltd is "bound to honor such assurance." .
The non-compliance with the specific undertaking and the subsequent statements in the media irritated the court, which subsequently issued notices to show reasons why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.
On April 15, the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority issued an order suspending the manufacturing licenses of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy.
In a new development, the state licensing authority has filed an affidavit in the high court stating that the suspension order has been canceled following a report by a high-level committee that examined the complaints of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the wake of the dispute. .He said that on May 17, the operation of the April 15 order was suspended and then the suspension order was canceled.
However, during the hearing, a bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta took note of Patanjali's affidavit dated May 16 in which the company claimed that the sale of these 14 products was stopped in light of the suspension order dated April 15.
The affidavit stated that the company has also taken steps to remove the related advertisements from its verified official social media accounts/handles. "Defendant number five (Patanjali Ayurved Ltd) is required to file an affidavit stating, among other things, whether has acceded to the request made to social media intermediaries and whether the advertisements of 14 products have been removed/removed," the court said.
The top court, which was hearing a plea filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) alleging a defamation campaign by Patanjali against the Covid vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine, asked the company to file its affidavit in a period of two weeks.
The court asked senior advocate P S Patwalia, representing the IMA, whether they had done due diligence and verified whether these advertisements were withdrawn after Patanjali filed the affidavit in May. During the hearing, a lawyer appearing for one of the petitioners said that the Center should investigate the matter related to misleading advertisements as quickly as possible.
"This is having a huge impact on the online industry," he said, adding: "The industry should not suffer. That is not the intent of the (court's) orders."
Justice Kohli said, "The intention is not to cause any harassment to anyone. The intention is only to focus on particular sectors and aspects." One of the advocates said that he was appearing for a radio association and they have 10-second long advertisements .
"We are also of the view that the industry should not suffer in any way. The approach of this court has already been highlighted in previous judgments and does not need repetition," the court said.
He said the issue should be discussed by authorities at the highest level. "We do not want there to be layers of approval so that anything that needs to be shortened and simplified is done," the court said.
Noting that the scope of the petition has been expanded in terms of its order passed on May 7, the court asked lawyer Shadan Farasat to assist the court as amicus curiae in the matter.
He said the amicus will help the court in collating the data provided by the state authorities, including the Center and other authorities, to save time and focus on the issues highlighted earlier by the court. "May we request you to convene a meeting so that all the stakeholders and senior officials of your department can brainstorm?" the court told Additional Solicitor General (ASG) K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre.
Nataraj said that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has held high-level meetings with various stakeholders with a view to resolving the issues and difficulties expressed by them.
"He (ASG) maintains that such meetings should be taken further... to rationalize the issues and point out the difficulties faced by the intervenors and the manner in which they can be resolved," the court noted. It asked the ministry to continue the "churning of ideas" and hold further meetings in this direction and submit an affidavit with its recommendations within three weeks.
The court said the affidavits filed by various state licensing authorities in the matter would be given to the amicus for perusal and to enable him to assist the court by pointing out whether there was any non-compliance on the part of any of the state authorities in terms of the orders. approved by the court.
The court has posted the matter for further hearing on July 30. On May 14, the high court had reserved its order on the contempt notice issued to yoga guru Ramdev, his assistant Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the case of misleading advertisements.
Patanjali Ayurved Ltd had assured the high court on November 21 last year that it would not violate any laws, especially those relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it.
It had also assured the court that "no casual statement asserting medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine shall be disclosed to the media in any manner." The apex court had said that Patanjali Ayurved Ltd is "bound to honor such assurance." .
The non-compliance with the specific undertaking and the subsequent statements in the media irritated the court, which subsequently issued notices to show reasons why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.
