"As far as the interim prayer sought in the said writ petition is concerned, the petitioner is seeking stay of operation of Ext.P1 to the extent of prohibiting the business of manufacturing, storing, distribution, sale and marketing of petitioner's products, which are mentioned above. The point vehemently submitted by the learned Advocate General is that this Court cannot grant a general declaration in favour of a manufacturer as far as the specified products mentioned in the writ petition are concerned. It is pointed out that if the petitioner is confronted with any action, they will have to be specifically prove that the said products are not covered by the notification. In fact, it is also pointed out that a declaration as sought for, cannot be granted by a writ Court, as the same will be misutilised by the manufacturers, sellers and distributors for selling other products which will disentitle the officers from taking any action. In the counter affidavit filed in the said writ petition, in para 2 it is stated that prohibition applies only in respect of gutka and panmasala containing tobacco and nicotine as ingredients. Contentions have been raised that the products of the petitioner referred to in the writ petition, do not conform to the regulations, viz. Food Safety and Standards (Packing and Labelling) Regulations, 2011. It is also alleged that the petitioner has not disclosed, the ingredients of the products in the label. It is explained that gutka and panmasala and other similar products have sweet smell and it is difficult to detect the ·use by the students even in the classrooms or in the school/college campuses, as these items are kept under the tongue."