CLARIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr. Pujari, learned AGP wavies service of notice of Rule for respondents No. 1 and 2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard.

(2.) THE short facts of the case appear to be that the sample of Dextrose Injection I. P. (10% W/v) was taken by the respondent No. 2 belonging to the petitioner, which is a product manufactured by the petitioner. As per the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') read with the Rules one portion of the sample was given to the petitioner, another was retained by the Inspector for sending it to the laboratory at the State level and third portion was retained for production in the Court. It appears that the sample, which was retained by respondent No. 2 has been sent for laboratory testing and it is found that the same is not meeting with the requisite parameters. The show-cause notice has been issued by respondent No. 2 to show cause as to why the prosecution should not be filed. The petitioner had intimated to respondent No. 2 that as per the provisions of Section 25 (3) of the Act, the sample also be tested by the Central Laboratory. No orders are passed by respondent No. 2, nor any action for sending the said sample to the Central Laboratory for testing. It is the contention of the petitioner that the expiry date of the said drug is 31. 12. 2008. Under these circumstances, the present petition.

(3.) THE petitioner has challenged the show-cause notice Annexure 'a', which Mr. Soparkar, during the course of the hearing, has declared that the petitioner is not pressing the said relief and the petitioner shall appear before the concerned authority. However, he submitted that he is pressing for prayer 7 (A) only for seeking directions to the respondent to send the sample for testing by Central Drug Laboratory, Kolkata.