Madras HC bars private companies from extracting ground water for commercial use
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has granted interim stay restraining private companies in Vedasandur in Dindigul district from extracting groundwater for commercial use. A Division Bench of Justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy issued the order on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by N Ramachandran of Vedasandur.
The petitioner stated that he had complained to officials about exploitation of ground water for commercial purpose. However no action was taken before he lodged a representation to the CM's grievance cell.
Though officials assured to take action, no action has been taken so far. Further, he stated that five RO water bottling plants were extracting ground water without obtaining certification/licence. This may lead to significant environmental issue and scarcity of water. 'No government authorities have taken effective action despite several representations and communications,' he stated and requested the court to direct authorities to initiate criminal and civil proceedings against the companies and collect fine/compensation from them.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
04-06-2025
- New Indian Express
‘No upkeep', NHAI can't levy toll on Thoothukudi NH: Madras HC
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on Tuesday directed National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) not to collect toll fee from motorists on the Madurai-Thoothukudi national highway (NH-38), till maintenance works are carried out. A bench of justices SM Subramaniam and AD Maria Clete passed the order on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by a retired Tangedco employee, V Balakrishnan of Thoothukudi. Balakrishnan contended that the contract for the road was awarded to Madurai-Tuticorin Expressways Limited (MTEL) of the Madhucon Projects Limited in 2006 and the road was brought to use in 2011. Though the estimated cost of the project was Rs 920 crore, the company had received around Rs 932.44 crore, without even fully completing the sapling plantation work on the roadside and the median, Balakrishnan alleged. The company collected fee from public on two toll plazas in the stretch, but failed to maintain the road surface, due to which many portions of the road became non-motorable, he added. As a result, NHAI terminated its contract with the company in 2023 and took control of the stretch but NHAI too began collecting toll fee, without carrying out repair and plantation works, Balakrishnan said and requested the court to direct NHAI to collect only 30% of toll fee till it undertakes maintenance work. Also, he sought action against the MTEL for its mismanagement. During the hearing on Tuesday, the government counsel submitted that arbitration proceedings are pending between NHAI and the company. Recording this, the judges passed the order and disposed of the petition. The matter was posted on June 18 for reporting compliance.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
03-06-2025
- Business Standard
Medical representatives barred from govt hospitals to stop pharma influence
Medical representatives will no longer be permitted to meet doctors directly within central government hospitals, following a directive from the Centre aimed at putting an end to the nexus between pharmaceutical companies and medical professionals, reported The Economic Times. The move seeks to curtail any influence exerted through gifts or free samples. According to the report, the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) has instructed all government-run hospitals to bar the entry of medical representatives. Instead, if pharmaceutical companies wish to share information about new treatments or medical advancements, they must do so through email or other digital media. DGHS's directive on disruptions and influence The order, dated May 28, directs heads of government medical institutions to ensure full compliance with the new policy. The directive also aims to put an end to disruptions to hospital operations caused by unregulated interactions between pharma representatives and doctors. Last year, the Department of Pharmaceuticals implemented the Uniform Code for Pharmaceuticals Marketing Practices (UCPMP), which bars pharmaceutical companies from offering gifts or travel perks to healthcare professionals or their relatives. The code also prohibits the provision of cash or monetary grants to doctors or their family members under any circumstances. The UCPMP also bans the distribution of free drug samples to individuals who are not authorised to prescribe them. Doctors must prescribe only generic drugs: SC In May, the Supreme Court declared that doctors across the country should be mandated to prescribe only generic medicines rather than branded alternatives. Generic drugs are designed to match their branded counterparts in terms of dosage, safety, efficacy, administration method, and therapeutic use. The observation came during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking tighter control over the marketing and promotional strategies employed by pharmaceutical companies. In 2023, the National Medical Commission (NMC) introduced new regulations under the 'Professional Conduct of Registered Medical Practitioners', requiring doctors to prescribe only generic medicines. The guidelines warned that failure to comply could lead to penalties, including suspension of medical licences. However, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) strongly opposed the government's directive. The body questioned the rationale behind continuing to licence branded medications if the government aims to prioritise generics. Following widespread backlash from the medical community, the NMC was forced to put the implementation of these guidelines on hold.
Time of India
30-05-2025
- Time of India
Adman Sandeep Goyal seeks government grip on surrogate ads in High Court battle
HighlightsSandeep Goyal, managing director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions, has filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Punjab and Haryana High Court advocating for a government-led regulatory body to address surrogate advertising issues. The petition highlights violations of key regulations, including the Cable Television Network Rules of 1994 and the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act of 2003, citing examples of surrogate advertising from prominent brands like Vimal Elaichi and Pan Bahar. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has acknowledged the petition, issuing notices to the Central Government, Central Consumer Protection Authority, and Central Board of Film Certification, indicating serious public health concerns related to misleading advertising practices. In a significant legal challenge, veteran adman Sandeep Goyal , the managing director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions , has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court , urging for a direct government-led regulatory body to curb the pervasive issue of surrogate advertising . The petition, currently under the scrutiny of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, contends that existing self-regulatory frameworks are insufficient and too sluggish to combat the real-time impact of these misleading promotions. Goyal, who has consistently refused to work with tobacco and alcohol brands since their advertising was banned in India, asserts that he holds no personal or financial stake in the outcome. His PIL highlights what he describes as blatant violations of crucial regulations, including the Cable Television Network Rules 1994, the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003, and the CCPA Guidelines on Misleading Advertisements 2022. The petition specifically points to prominent examples of alleged surrogate advertising, citing brands like Vimal Elaichi, Rajshree Silver Coated Elaichi, and Pan Bahar. These ads, often featuring well-known celebrities, are frequently seen during prime-time television slots and high-profile events such as IPL broadcasts. Goyal argues that such promotions subtly endorse restricted products, misleading consumers and contributing to a growing public health crisis, particularly among young people. "The country is undergoing a health crisis wherein the youth of the nation is getting addicted to alcohol and tobacco at a tender age," the petition states, emphasizing how celebrity endorsements "glamorize" and "validate" the consumption of these products. The PIL underscores the ineffectiveness of current industry self-regulation, including the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), in adequately reining in these deceptive practices. Goyal's petition, argued by advocate Aadil Singh Boparai, seeks strict enforcement of existing laws and guidelines. Crucially, it calls for a more robust, government-led mechanism to actively supervise all advertising content. The High Court has taken cognizance of the matter, issuing notices to the central government, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). This move signals the judiciary's recognition of the potential public health implications of unchecked surrogate advertising, setting the stage for a significant legal debate on the future of advertising regulation in India.
