Read Time: 11 minutes

Synopsis

The Deputy Solicitor General of India on Friday last week informed the Allahabad High Court that after the indulgence of the high court, notices were issued to some of the Padma Award recipients by the Central Consumer Protection Authority who were found involved in ‘misleading’ advertisements' of Gutka and Pan Masala.

Before the bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Deputy Solicitor General of India, SB Pandey, submitted that all appropriate and requisite exercises have been undertaken.

He also informed the court that one of the Padma recipients, Hindi movies actor Amitabh Bachchan has sent a legal notice to 'Pan Masala Brand' as he is said to have discontinued himself from the advertisement of the brand, but he is being shown in such advertisement.

Moreover, the court was told by the Dpt. SGI that for disposal of the similar/ identical issues, a special bench is to be constituted at the Apex Court and the issue in question may likely be adjudicated by it. In view of the same, he urged the court to defer the proceedings of the present contempt petition which seeks contempt action against the government authorities due to non-compliance of court's September 2022 order.

On October 9, before the same single judge bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, the applicant-in-person, Adv Moti Lal Yadav, had argued that the government had not informed as to what action had been taken against those person, who had breached the guidelines so issued for awarding the decoration of 'Padma Bhushan' and 'Padma Shri'.

Yadav's had put forth this argument in response to the submission of the counsel for the Central Government that substantial compliance of court's order had been made and also by an order dated 12th September 2023 passed by the Under Secretary on behalf of Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), notices had been issued to Vimal Pan Masala, Kamla Pasand and Ashok & Company Pan Bahar Ltd along with some more notices to other company dealing with Pan Masala etc.

Adv Moti Lal Yadav moved the present contempt petition due to non-compliance of court's September 2022 order, which directed the centre to address the grievance raised by him in a Public Interest Litigation concerning participation of ‘certain’ Padma awardees in ‘misleading’ advertisements'.

In 2022, Adv Yadav filed a PIL plea before the high court highlighting Padma awardees endorsing harmful products in advertisements, raising concerns about public health. He prayed for formulation of guidelines to revoke awards if awardees engage in inappropriate conduct. 

The PIL plea named numerous individuals such as Amitabh Bachchan, Shah Rukh Khan, Akshay Kumar, Ajay Devgan, and Saif Ali Khan as respondents. It also included the managing directors of Paan and Gutka companies, specifically Vimal Gutkha, Kamla Pasand Pan Masala, and Pan Bahar products.

On September 9, 2022, in the PIL, the high court issued two directions. The court ordered that:

(1) For framing the guidelines as prayed for by the petitioner in the petition, he may approach the competent authority in the Central Government by way of making an appropriate representation setting forth therein all the pleas which may be available to him under law. And

(2) For redressal of the grievances relating to violation of consumer rights/unfair trade practices/false and misleading advertisement, he may take recourse to the statutory mechanism for redressal of the grievances available to him under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 by approaching the Collector/Commissioner or even the Central Consumer Protection Authority. In case the petitioner approaches the aforesaid authorities, grievances which may be raised by him shall appropriately be attended to in accordance with law, with expedition."

However, the petitioner, on August 24, 2023, informed the court that in compliance of court's above-mentioned directions, he approached the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India and the Chief Commissioner, Central Consumer Protection Authority, New Delhi preferring a detailed representation dated October 15, 2022, through the registered post but till date, no decision had been taken by the authorities in compliance of the order of the writ court.

Moreover, he submitted that the issue in question was no more res-integra as the Apex Court in the case of Balaji Raghavan vs. Union of India, (1996) had issued positive guidelines to address the issue in question.

On Friday, the high cour, having considered the aforesaid submissions of the Deputy Solicitor General of India and the petitioner-in-person, that he was only concerned to the public interest at large and had no objection if the contempt proceedings were deferred for sometime, the single judge bench defer the hearing of the present contempt petition for five months.

The matter will be next heard on May 9, 2024.

"On that date, learned counsel for the Union of India and Sri Moti Lal Yadav, Advocate, the petitioner, shall apprise the Court about the status of the proceedings, if any, pending before the Apex Court and also about the further action, if so taken in compliance of order of the Apex Court, which has already been passed and has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) of the petitioner," the high court ordered. 

Case Title: Moti Lal Yadav v. Sri Rajiv Gowba, Cabinet Secy. Central Secrtt. Govt. Of India, New Delhi And Another