NAVDEEP AGARWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of mandamus declaring Rule 65 (15) (c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules of 1945 as amended and section 42 of the Pharmacy Act of 4943. THE petitioners also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to cancle the licence or refuse to renew the licence of the petitioners. THE petitioners stated in the writ petition to be the Chemists and Druggists engaged in doing retail business of selling manufactured drugs in the form of tablets, powders, liquids and ointments etc. THEy pleaded not to maintain any pharmacy for compounding the drugs and serving prescription of medical practitioners. THE questions and grounds raised in the present writ petition were considered and finally decided in group of writ petitions, M/s. J. Das Brothers through Sri L. N. Gupta v. Union of India, 1992 (1) ECFAR 606.

(2.) THE Division Bench referring the case (supra) upheld the validity of Rule 65 (15) (c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules and also held that the provisions of the Rules and section 42 of the Pharmacy Act do not, in any manner,, offends the provisions of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. THE Division Bench held :

(3.) THE petitioners have also reproduced in para 16 of the writ petition the order passed finally in writ petition No..........of 1993, Jain Medical Store v. Union of India and others by the Division Bench consisting of Honourable V. N. Khare and Honourable N. B, Asthana, JJ. on 23-3-1993, which is as follows :