Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PRIMA BEVERAGES LIMITED versus UNION OF INDIA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


PRIMA BEVERAGES LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA - OP No. 12023 of 2001(F) [2007] RD-KL 15919 (17 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 12023 of 2001(F)

1. PRIMA BEVERAGES LIMITED
... Petitioner

Vs

1. UNION OF INDIA
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN

For Respondent :SENIOR CENTRAL GOVT. STANDING COUNCEL

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :17/08/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.

O.P.No.12023 of 2001-F

Dated, this the 17th day of August, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu, C.J. Petitioner is an industrial unit engaged in the manufacture of purified drinking water. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"a) declare that Exhibit P1 notification issued by the Central Government under Section 23 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act is ultra vires the powers of the Central Government under Section 23 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and therefore illegal and without jurisdiction.

b) declare that regulation No.6(2) of the Bureau of Indian Standards certification regulation insofar as it empowers the executive committee of the Bureau of Indian Standards to levy marking fee on any product sought to be certified by the Bureau is beyond the powers of the Bureau of Indian Standards under Section 15(2) read with Section 38(2)(e) of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986.

c) award the cost of this petition to the petitioner; and

d) grant such other reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." (2) This Court while entertaining the original petition had granted an interim order. The said interim order reads as under: "Heard both sides.

The Original Petition is being recommended for placing before a Bench. In order that the petitioner may maintain status quo, until appropriate orders are obtained from the Bench, there will be an interim order as prayed for operative till 11.4.2001." (3) The said interim order granted by this Court was extended by six weeks at the first instance, and thereafter it was extended by one month. O.P.No.12023/2001 2 (4) During the pendency of the original petition, we are informed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the petitioner has complied with the notification issued by the Union of India. (5) In view of the above, as on today, the relief sought for by the petitioner in this original petition does not survive for consideration of this Court and accordingly it is disposed of as having become unnecessary. (6) It is made clear that the respondents shall not initiate any prosecution proceedings against the petitioner during the period of stay that was operating against them. (7) Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.19223 and 25083 of 2001 are also dismissed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

vns


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.