Delhi High Court stays regulator’s curb on ORS branding in relief for J&J arm

Justice Sachin Datta, disposing of the plea, recorded the Centre’s submission made through its standing counsel Satya Ranjan Swain, that the FSSAI orders shall not be given effect till JNTL Consumer Health is given an opportunity of hearing and their representation is decided on.

The company has submitted that the approximate value of their product manufactured or which are in the supply chain, including trade, is in the range of Rs 155-180 crore.

JNTL Consumer Health moved a petition before Delhi HC on October 16, taking objection to two orders by the FSSAI on October 14 and 15 declaring that use of term ‘ORS’ with prefixes or suffixes in product names violates the FSS Act.

Terming the FSSAI orders as “ex facie arbitrary and unreasonable” which have been “issued in a haste,” the companypointed out that the October orders “abruptly withdrew” previous orders by the body, in July 2022 and in February 2024, which had permitted the continued use of the term ORS with prefixes or suffixes in registered trademarks subject to specific disclaimers.

In July 2022 FSSAI had permitted food business operators (FBOs) with valid registered trademarks containing “ORS” to continue manufacturing under their marks till Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks decision, subject to disclaimers on the front of pack.

FBOs without trademarks were directed to discontinue use and were granted six months to exhaust stock. In February 2024, FSSAI further issued a clarificatory order permitting FBOs with registered trademarks to use “ORS” along with a prefix or suffix, subject to a mandatory front-of-pack declaration

In its October 14 order, FSSAI declared a withdrawal of all previous orders permitting use of “ORS” along with brand names with immediate effect. The next day, in another order, it further clarified that even use of “ORS” with prefix or suffix will constitute a violation of the FSS Act and Regulations, declaring such products “misbranded”, and violation of the order being liable for punishment under Sections 52 and 53 of the FSS Act.

The FSSAI had reasoned that “the use of the term “ORS” in the trademarked name or in the naming of any food product otherwise- whether fruit-based, non-carbonated, or ready-to-drink beverages-even when accompanied by a prefix or suffix, constitutes a violation of the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the regulations made thereunder,” and had concluded that “such practices are misleading to consumers by way of false, deceptive, ambiguous, and erroneous names/label declarations”.