‘Vicks Action 500 Extra’ with immediate effect after the government banned

FMCG firm Procter and Gamble (P&G) has discontinued the manufacture and sale of its popular brand ‘Vicks Action 500 Extra’ with immediate effect after the government banned fixed dose combination drugs.

“The Government of India has prohibited the manufacture for sale, sale and distribution of fixed dose combination drugs (Paracetamol + Phenylephrine + Caffeine) with immediate effect,” Pfizer said in a BSE filing.

It further said: “Our product ‘Vicks Action 500 Extra’ has the same fixed dose combination and is covered under the notification. We have discontinued the manufacture and sale of all SKUs of ‘Vicks Action 500 Extra with immediate effect.”

In a gazette notification on March 10, the government had, among others,banned manufacture, sale and distribution of fixed dose combinationof chlopheniramine maleate plus codiene syrup which is used in the cough syrups.

On Monday, drug majors Pfizer and Abbott stopped sale of their popular cough syrups Corex and Phensedyl respectively, after the government banned over 300 fixed dose combinations (FDCs) drugs.

The two companies, however, said they are exploring “all options” to counter the impact of ban.

Pfizer said it has stopped the sale of its Corex cough syrup that garnered sales of Rs. 176 crore in the nine-month period ended December 31, and said the government’s move will have an adverse impact on it.

“The company is exploring all available options at its disposal... The prohibition is likely to have an adverse impact on the revenue and profitability of the company,” Pfizer had said in a BSE filing.

In view of the government ban on manufacture and sale of Corex, the “company has discontinued the manufacture and sale of it’s drug ‘Corex’ with immediate effect,” Pfizer said adding that Corex has a well established efficacy and safety profile in India for more then 30 years.

Abbott also stopped sale of its Phensedyl cough syrup.

When contacted a company spokesperson said: “Abbott is complying with all legal requirements related to the government notification.”

The company termed the Health Ministry’s decision to ban “certain fixed dose combinations drugs that have been already approved” as an “unilateral approach”.

“Abbott has reviewed the DCGI notification and we are concerned about the unilateral approach in prohibiting the manufacture, sale and distribution of certain fixed dose combinations that have already been approved for use by DCGI. We are evaluating the notification and exploring all available options,” the spokesperson said.

Some of these formulations have been the treatment of choice in specific medical conditions, Abbott said.

“We are concerned that patients may not have access to some medicines which have been approved by DCGI and safely and effectively used in India for years,” Abbott spokesperson said.

Grant of HRA at a higher rate (“B” Category) to the Central Government Servants

Grant of HRA at a higher rate (“B” Category) to the Central Government Servants Posted at Aizawl (Mizoram) – Court Case regarding

RD570050807IN

COURT-CASE
MOST URGENT

F.No.4-23/2000-PAP
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION & IT
DEPARTMENT OF POSTS
(ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION)/P.A.P.SECTION
DAK BHAWAN, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI – 110 001

DATED, THE 01ST MARCH, 2016.

TO

The Chief Post Master General
N.E.Postal Circle
Shillong – 793001

ORDER

Subject: Grant of HRA at a higher rate (‘B’ Category) to the Central Government Servants Posted at Aizawl (Mizoram) – Court Case regarding.

Central Government Employees Federation of Mizoram, General Head Quarters, Aizawl, Mizoram made a representation to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India claiming House Rent Allowance at “B” Class City rates and Compensation in lieu of Rent Free Accommodation at the rate of 10% to the Central Government Employees Posted in Mizoram State based on the judgement passed by Supreme court of India in Civil Appeal No.2715/91-Union of India & Ors V/s Shri S.K.Ghosh & Others and Department of Posts Order No.8-40/87-PAP dated 7.3.1994 & No.4-52/98-PAP dated 27.02.1999. On rejection of their claim, the Central Government Employees posted in the State of Mizoram approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati under O.A.No.381/2000. The Hon’ble CAT, in Para -5 of its order dated 12.04.2002 pronounced as under:-

“In view of the position enumerated above,I am of the-view that the applicants are entitled to House Rent Allowance at the rate prescribed for B class cities to the Central Government Employees which should be payable to the applicants at the rate of 15% from 1.1.1986 to 30.9.1986 and from 1.10.86 to 30.9.1986 and from 1.10.86 to 30.9.86 and from 1.10.1986 at flat rate prescribed under O.M.dated 7.8.1987 read with another O.M.dated 13.11.1987 and the Notification GSR No.623 (E) amending the Fundamental Rule 45 A with effect from 1.7.1987.

As regards the claim for compensation in lieu of Rent Free Accommodation the respondents are to act in conformity with the Office Memorandum No.12-11/60-ACC-I dated 2.8.1960,O.M.dated 23.2.1986 and 22.5.1987 and also to O.M.dated 13.11.1987. The respondents shall examine the each case on merits and thereafter shall pass necessary order in individual cases. Rent free unfurnished accommodation is admissible to Central Government Employees having all India transfer liability only those who are posted in Mizoram or HRA at the rate prescribed from time to time. Compensation and admissible HRA shall be granted to those persons who are entitled to rent free accommodation and could not be provided accommodation and the above benefit shall be granted only to the Central Government employees having all India Transfer liability and Posted in Mizoram vide letter No.11015/1/E/(B)/76 dated 31.7.1977. The respondents shall examine the individual cases and thereafter pass necessary orders in those Cases, others will not be eligible for the same.The application is allowed in part, No Costs”.

2. The Department filed WP No.2955/2003 in the Hon’ble High Court of Guwahati against the orders of the CAT dated 12.04.2002.The Hon’ble High court in its judgment dated 25.4.2003, “disposed of the appeal with the observations that the directions given by the Learned Tribunal in the last part of the judgment quoted above shall be complied with by the Central Government after taking due consideration of the observations recorded within a period of 6 Months. The High court observed that the case of each and every Central Government employee posted in the state of Mizoram will have to be taken separately and appropriate orders shall be passed thereon after such consideration in terms of OM dated 23.09.86, 19.03.87 and 13.11.87. The Hon’ble High court, however, observed that the employees posted in Aizawl Headquarters of the State of Mizoram being a “C”Class city may not be entitled to HRA as prescribed for “B” class cities.”

3. Aggrieved by the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Guwahati, the Central Government Employees filed a civil appeal No.646/2005 in the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme court stayed the operation of the judgment order dated 25.04.2003 of the high court of Guwahati in WP No.2955/2003. The Honble supreme Court of India has dismissed the civil appeal and passed the orders dated 17.07.2013 as under:-

“We have thoughtfully considered the submissions of the learned counsel. In our view, the direction given by the Tribunal, which has been confirmed by the High Court, merely ordains consideration of the cases of each employee for grant of City compensatory Allowance in accordance with O.M. dated 02.08.1960, O.M. dated 23.02.1986 and 2.5.1987 as also O.M.dated 13.11.1987 and nothing more. Therefore, the impugned order as also the one passed by the Tribunal do not call for interference by this court under Article 136 of the Constitution.

With the above observation, the appeal is dismissed.

However, it is made clear that if the Government of India has issued fresh instructions after 13.11.1987 then the cases of the respondents shall be considered in accordance with the latest instructions.”

4. Consequent upon obtaining the concurrence of Integrated Finance Wing of this Department, the, matter was referred to Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure for decision.

5. Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure has considered the matter and accorded their approval in view of the decision taken by the Department of Posts to not to file any Review petition in the matter and as the Ministry of Law & Justice has advised Department of Posts to take administrative decision for implementation of the said order of Hon’ble Tribunal, implementation of the Order dated 12.04.2002 passed by the Hon’ble CAT, Guwahati Bench in O.A.No.381/2000 for grant of House Rent Allowance at “B/Y” class cities rates, as admissible from time to time, is agreed to.

6. Since, the Department of Posts had represented the Union of India on behalf of all the respondents Ministries/Departments/Offices, the approval accorded by the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance is therefore conveyed to all the Respondent Ministries/Departments/Offices for issuing appropriate instructions for compliance of orders dated 12.04.2002 of Hon’ble CAT, Guwahati Bench in respect of the employees working under their administrative control who were/are applicants in the said OA No.381/2000.

7. This has the approval of the Competent Authority.

sd/-
(K.V.Vijayakumar)
Assistant Director General (Estt.)

Source: http://aipeup3bbsr.blogspot.in/