The matter will be heard next on 7 August 2012.
ALMT Legal partners Hitesh Jain and Subhash Jadav with associate Stuti Jain acted for six Gutkha manufacturers including Ghodawat, in challenging the constitutional validity of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restrictions on Sales) Regulations 2011 – the regulations that impose a ban on the manufacture and sale of gutka in Maharashtra.
The petition also challenged the food commissioner’s order of 19 July 2012, prohibiting storage, sale or distribution of gutka in Maharashtra.
Chief justice Mohit Shah and justice NM Jamdar ordered an interim stay on the food commissioner’s order directing the destruction of the gutka siezed frrom the petitioner’s plants, and fixed 7 August for looking into the questions of constitutional validity.
Jain said that while the commissioner’s argument was that gutka was harmful for health and carcinogenic, the gutka makers were challenging its constitutional validity, and arguing that the product was already governed by the Tobacco Act 2003 and not the food safety laws.
Advocate Nalawde acted for the Maharashtra government, instead of advocate general of Maharashtra Darius Khambata who was absent yesterday. On 12 July 2012, the Maharashtra government ordered a state-wide ban on the sale of gutka, reported Express India.
Jain told Legally India that paan masala products were an industry worth Rs 2,000 crore, of which Ghodawat and Dhariwal industries were the biggest players.
The petition stated that thousands of farmers of areca nut and betel nut, either employed by the petitioners, or independent suppliers to the petitioners depend on them for their livelihood.
Photo by Vandana Rajagopalan
Comments
Surely they had a small role to play?
Darius Khambata was indeed the ASG until March end this year.
However he was appointed advocate general for Maharashtra on 26 March, and Kevic Setalvad was appointed to fill the consequently vacated post of Bombay HC's ASG on 8 July.
Best wishes,
Prachi
Are you sure that the above article is not misleading as most of the news channels have said that there was no interim stay granted by the Bombay High Court.
Please check your facts before publishing such paid articles.
Thank you for your comment.
We are investigating this, kindly bear with us.
Best wishes,
Prachi
Please don't publish such misleading articles. The stay is not on the notification.
As regards, no destruction of the pouches of Gutka are concerned the same was a statement made by the counsel appearing for the State and not some relief granted by the court.
ALMT has pretty much not got anything as of yet as and by way of a relief from the High Court.
Also the practice of uploading soft copies of writ petitions is extremely cheesy and down market and firms like these should avoid it.