The Institute of Public Health v. The State Government of Karnataka, et al.
The Institute of Public Health sought an order enjoining the Indian Tobacco Board from sponsoring an international tobacco promotion event, alleging that the sponsorship violated the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA). By an interim order, the Court ordered the Tobacco Board to refrain from sponsoring the event and prohibited it from sponsoring or promoting similar events in the future. In this final order, the Court entered petitioner’s draft code of conduct into the record and noted in its order that the Union of India will consider this draft to frame a code of conduct. The Court disposed of the remaining relief sought, concluding that the respondents were now in compliance with the law.
The Institute of Public Health v. The State Government of Karnataka, et al., W.P. No. 27692/2010, High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore (2011).
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.
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.
"At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that the petitioner by way of affidavit would like-' to propose Code of Conduct for public officials, to prevent Tobacco Industry's interference · in· developing and implementing public health policies and programs related to tobacco control. The Iearned Assistant Solicitor General submits that the proposal given by the petitioner would be considered properly by the Union of India while framing the Code of Conduct for public officials to prevent Tobacco Industry's interference in developing and implementing public health policies and programs related to tobacco control."
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 Institute of Public Health sought an order enjoining the Indian Tobacco Board from sponsoring an international tobacco promotion event, alleging that the sponsorship violated the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA). By an interim order, the Court ordered the Tobacco Board to refrain from sponsoring the event and prohibited it from sponsoring or promoting similar events in the future. In this final order, the Court entered petitioner’s draft code of conduct into the record and noted in its order that the Union of India will consider this draft to frame a code of conduct. The Court disposed of the remaining relief sought, concluding that the respondents were now in compliance with the law.