A Single Bench of the Madras High Court directed to issue L-2 license under Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956 as renewal fees paid within statutory period.
The writ Petition was filed by the petitioner, Krishnaveni under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to the Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in proceeding No.M(M) Aa.1(1)/7570/2006confirming the order of second respondent, The District Collector, Kanyakumari in his proceeding and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to issue the L-2 license to the petitioner’s pharmacy namely Prithik Ayurveda Pharmacy as per the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956 and SP11 license under the Tamil Nadu Spirituous Preparation Control Rules, 1984 within the time fixed by the Court.
The Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has obtained license to manufacture and sale of Ayurvedic (including siddha or unani drugs) as contemplated under Rule 154 of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945 in Form No.25-D originally from 02.11.1999 to 31.12.2000. Thereafter, the license was renewed under Form No.26-D on 11.09.2004. However, for the purpose of selling the ayurvedic medicines, the petitioner requires L-2 license under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956 as contemplated under Rule 83 of the said Rules.
The petitioner had applied for the said L-2 license before the second respondent herein. The District Collector by an order, has rejected the said request on the ground that the petitioner’s license under Form No.25-D has not been extended or renewed and since the license under Form No.25-D has not been renewed, the petitioner is not entitled to a license under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956.
Justice R Vijayakumar observed that “In the present case, the petitioner has established that he has paid the renewal fee within a period of one month from the date of expiry of the renewal period and no adverse orders have been passed as against the petitioner rejecting the request for renewal. Hence, the license of the petitioner under the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules 1945 is deemed to have been renewed up to 31.12.2024. Hence, the respondent authorities were not right in holding that the petitioner was not holding drug license for the relevant period.”
“However, the petitioner requires a license under form SP-11 under the Tamil Nadu Spirituous Preparations (Control) Rules 1984. Admittedly, the petitioner has not even applied for the said license before the concerned authorities. The order impugned in the writ petition is set side and the second respondent is directed to issue a L-2 license in favour of the writ petitioner” the Court added.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
