VINCENT PANIKURLANGARA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [1987] 2 S.C.R. 468 · Decided: 03-03-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
VINCENT PANIKURLANGARA 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
MARCH 3, 1987 
[RANGANATH MISRA AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950, Article 144-Civil and judicial 
authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court-Public Interest Litiga-
tion relating to drug policy filed in the interest of nation's health-
Statutory bodies except State of Karnataka responding to Supreme 
C Court's notice-Constitutional obligation stressed. 
D 
Public Interest Litigation-Health Care for citizens-Whether the 
Supreme Court could interfere with the matter touching the policy of the 
Government and the duty cast under Article 47 of the Constitution. 
The petitioner, an advocate by profession bas moved the Supreme 
Court in public interest seeking directions banning import, manu-
facture, sale and distribution of such drugs which have been banned in 
Western countries or recommended to he banned by the Drugs Con-
sultative Committee under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The 
petitioner has' also sought directions, (i) for cancellation of licences 
E authorlsig import, manufacture, sale and distribution of such drugs; (ii) 
for Constitution of a high powered Authority to go into the hazards 
suffered by people of the country on account of such drugs being in 
circulation and suggest remedial measures including award of 
F 
G 
H 
compensation. 
Disposing of the petition, the Court, 
HELD: 1. Statutory bodies when called upon by a Court, in 
particular the apex Court of the Country, are duty-bound to respond 
and join the proceedings before the Court, as required by Article 144 of 
the Constitution. These bodies are not litigants and do not have the 
choice or'keeping away from the Court like private parties in ordinary 
litigations opting to go ex parte. The present matter is certainly one 
which is sufficiently important and the stake of the entire nation is high 
when the Court suoe moto extended the opportunity of being heard and 
invited the named statutory or other authorities to come forward and 
place their view points on relevant aspects, an attitude of callous indif-
468 
\ 
l 
... ·1· 
-1 
.... 
-.. 
t-
-+ 
VINCENT PANIKURLANGARA v. U.0.1. 
469 
ference cannot be appreciated. It is hoped that there would be no repeti-
tion of such a situation. [47SG-H; 476A-B] 
P. Nalla Thampy v. Union of India, [1983] 4 SCC 598, followed. 
. 2. Having regard to the magnitude, complexity and technical 
nature of the enquiry involved in the matter and keeping in view of the 
far reaching implications of the total ban of certain medicines for which 
the petitioner has prayed, it is clear that a judicial proceeding of the 
nature initiated is not an appropriate one for determination of such 
matters. [476H; 477A] 
2.2 The issues raised in this petition are of vital importance as they 
relate to maintenance of approved standards of drugs in general; the 
writ petition involves the claim for withdrawal of 7000 fixed dose com-
binations and withdrawal of licences of manufacturers engaged in 
manufacture of about 30 drugs which have been licensed by the Drugs 
Control Authorities; the issues that fall for consideration are not only 
relating to technical and specialised matters relating to therapeutic 
value, justification and harmful side effect of drugs hut also involve 
examination of the ectness of action taken by the respondents 1 and 2 on 
the basis of advice; the matter also involves the interest of manufactur-
ers and traders of drugs as also the interest of patients who require 
drugs for their treatment. The technical aspects which arise for consid-
eration in a matter of this type cannot be effectively handled by.a Court. 
Similarly the question of policy which is involved in the matter is also 
one for the Union Government-keeping the best of interests of citizens 
in view to decide. No final say in regard to such aspects come under the 
purview of the Court. [4760-F; 478F-G 
2.3 This branch namely, Health Care of citizens, is a problem 
with various facets. It involves and over-changing challenge. There 
appears to be, as it were, a constant competition between Nature (which 
can be said to be responsible for new ailments) on the side and human 
ingenuity engaged in research and finding out curative processes. This 
being the situation, the problem has an ever-shifting base. It is common 
place that what is considered to be the best medicine today for treat-
ment of a particular disease becomes out of date and soon goes out of the 
m

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.