CADILA LABORATORIES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Letters Patent Appeal 2175 of 2009, order dtd. 31/7/2009 passed in Special Civil Application 7724 of 1990 has been challenged where-under the respondents sought to recover the liability under Drug Price Equalization Account in respect of "RIFAMPICIN" bulk drug by issuance of the impugned notice dtd. 17/10/1990, whereas in Special Civil Application 5550 of 1999, the following prayer has been sought :

(2.) Mr. Devang Nanavati, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners would submit that he would not press prayer 23(A). Hence, same is dismissed as not pressed.

(3.) Mr. Devang Nanvati, learned Senior Advocate and Mr. Mihir Thakore, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respective writ applicants would submit that the issue involved in this appeal and petition are laid to rest by two judgments of two different High Courts namely, High Court of Mumbai and High Court of Karnataka by judgment dtd. 14/10/2009 passed in Writ Petition 26118 of 2005 connected with Writ Petition No. 9463 of 2006 (GM-RES) which was confirmed in Writ Appeal No. 4408 of 2011 dtd. 26/9/2012 and affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 22235 of 2013 dtd. 15/7/2015 and also similar view was taken by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 119 of 1999 vide order dtd. 19/2/2013 which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 031566 of 2013 vide common order dtd. 15/7/2015. Mr. Harsheel Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the respondents does not seriously dispute this fact.