Cancer Patients Aid Association v. Karnataka Health and Family Welfare Dept., et. al.
The Cancer Patients Aid Association sued the State of Karnataka to enforce the ban on the sale of tobacco products within 100 yards from educational institutions. This decision demands a report regarding whether any measures were taken to comply with the ban. The court calls for paper circulars and display boards banning such sales. Random inspections and reporting mechanisms are also discussed.
Cancer Patients Aid Association v. Karnataka Health and Family Welfare Dept., et. al., WP No. 17958, High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore (2010).
An individual or organization may sue their own government in order to advance or protect the public interest. For example, an NGO may sue the government claiming the government’s weak tobacco control laws violated their constitutional right to health.
Measures restricting tobacco sales to or by minors, as well as other retail restrictions relating to point-of-sale, candy and toys resembling tobacco products, vending machines, or free distribution.
(See FCTC Art. 16)
A claim of a violation of a tobacco control law or statute.
Type of Tobacco Product
None
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
"Having gone through the application filed for issuance of directions and on hearing Mr Anand Grover, learned senior counsel representing the petitioners, we direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to look into the matter and submit whether any measures are taken to comply with the procedure and the Rules made thereunder to prohibit or ban the sale of tobacco and tobacco products within 100 yards from the educational institution either the School or the College concerned."
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The Cancer Patients Aid Association sued the State of Karnataka to enforce the ban on the sale of tobacco products within 100 yards from educational institutions. This decision demands a report regarding whether any measures were taken to comply with the ban. The court calls for paper circulars and display boards banning such sales. Random inspections and reporting mechanisms are also discussed.