Tamil Nadu has extended the prohibition on the manufacture, storage, transport, distribution, and sale of chewable food products containing tobacco and nicotine.
Tamil Nadu has extended the prohibition on the manufacture, storage, transport, distribution, and sale of chewable food products containing tobacco and nicotine.
The ban, which will be in effect for one year starting from May 23, has been announced by the state Commissioner of Food Safety and Drug Administration. This decision comes after the Supreme Court stayed the Madras High Court’s order that had previously lifted the ban on such products.
The ban, which will be in effect for one year starting from May 23, has been announced by the state Commissioner of Food Safety and Drug Administration. This decision comes after the Supreme Court stayed the Madras High Court’s order that had previously lifted the ban on such products.
The bench of justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna stayed the high court’s decision.
The bench of justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna stayed the high court’s decision.
The state government appealed against the high court’s decision, and the Supreme Court acknowledged the need for a stay.
The state government appealed against the high court’s decision, and the Supreme Court acknowledged the need for a stay.
State has the right to safeguard the health of its citizens
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal and Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari, who had appeared for the Tamil Nadu government, said that the state government has the right to safeguard the health of its citizens. The Supreme Court sought a response to the plea challenging the Madras High Court’s order, and arguments were presented by senior advocates representing both the government and the firms involved in the trade of gutkha and pan masala.
State has the right to safeguard the health of its citizens
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal and Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari, who had appeared for the Tamil Nadu government, said that the state government has the right to safeguard the health of its citizens. The Supreme Court sought a response to the plea challenging the Madras High Court’s order, and arguments were presented by senior advocates representing both the government and the firms involved in the trade of gutkha and pan masala.
The high court had quashed the notification, deeming it to be beyond the powers of the food safety commissioner and raising concerns about conferring such powers without legal provision.
The high court had quashed the notification, deeming it to be beyond the powers of the food safety commissioner and raising concerns about conferring such powers without legal provision.
The state government, in its appeal, emphasized the health hazards associated with tobacco consumption and highlighted the validity of the regulations prohibiting the use of tobacco or nicotine in food products.
The state government, in its appeal, emphasized the health hazards associated with tobacco consumption and highlighted the validity of the regulations prohibiting the use of tobacco or nicotine in food products.
Meanwhile, the tobacco traders and manufacturers argued that the state government lacked the authority to impose a permanent ban, suggesting that prosecution for food standards violations would be more appropriate.
Meanwhile, the tobacco traders and manufacturers argued that the state government lacked the authority to impose a permanent ban, suggesting that prosecution for food standards violations would be more appropriate.