Delhi High Court: The present petition was filed by Dr. Reddy Laboratories (‘petitioner’), assailing the orders dated 14-10-2025, 15-10-2025 and a communication dated 23-10-2025 (‘impugned orders’), wherein the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (‘FSSAI’) had banned the use of the term Oral Rehydration Salts (‘ORS’) in the naming of any food product, fruit-based non-carbonated or ready-to-drink beverage. A Single Judge Bench of Sachin Datta, J., noted that the impugned orders had been passed by the FSSAI keeping in mind the adverse public health risk due to consumption of fruity drinks with high sugar content and imbalanced electrolytes that have been misbranded and misrepresented as ‘ORS’. The Court stated that the impugned orders were regulatory measures applicable across the food industry and thus declined to interdict with the impugned orders.
Background
The instant petition had been filed assailing the impugned order wherein the FSSAI had sought to impose an embargo on the use of the word ‘ORS’, whether as a standalone term or in combination with any prefix or suffix, in the naming of any food product, fruit-based non-carbonated or ready-to-drink beverage.
The petitioner had averred that the impugned order had been passed without any consultation or even any notice or hearing of the stakeholders concerned. The petitioner had also submitted that the impugned order would adversely impact their ongoing operations since large quantities of the product was already lying in storage and within the supply chain.
Analysis, Law and Decision
The Court noted the order dated 30-10-25, wherein the FSSAI had held that the use of the term ‘ORS’ or any phonetically/visually similar expression in food product names, trade marks, or labels is misleading and deceptive within the meaning of Sections 23 and 24 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (‘FSS Act’) and violates the Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Regulations, 2020 and the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018.
The FSSAI order further stated that the term ‘ORS’ is a non-proprietary, generic name for a WHO-prescribed therapeutic formulation recognized under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, and is in the public domain. Its use in any food product label or brand name even as part of a composite mark creates confusion between a Drug/ therapeutic product (Licenced under Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation) and a food product (Licenced under FSSAI). The order also stated that several products containing the term ‘ORS’ within their brand name were selling water-based, flavoured or fruit-based drinks containing high sugar levels and imbalanced electrolytes rather than the WHO recommended ORS formula which was aggravating dehydration in children, elderly and diabetic patients. This constituted misbranding and misleading representation under Sections 23 and 24 of the FSS Act and regulatory oversight was required under public interest.
The Court noted that the measures taken by the FSSAI were in serious public health considerations and to effectuate the statutory mandate of the FSSAI. The Court stated that the impugned orders were regulatory measures applicable across the food industry and thus, declined to interdict with the impugned orders. The Court directed the FSSAI to consider the aspect of re-branding of existing inventory on a representation made by the petitioner in that regard.
[Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India, W.P. (C) No. 16303 of 2025, decided on 31-10-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: Neelima Tripathi, Senior Advocate, Sanam Tripathi, Anjali Kaushik, Kriti Sharma, Harjeet Singh, Advocates, Gopal K. Gangawali, AR
For the Respondent: Chetan Sharma, ASG, Ashish K. Dixit, CGSC, Aamir Zafar Khan, Umar Hashmi, Amit Gupta, Shubham Sharma, Abdullah Shahid, Vikram Aditya Singh,Yash Wardhan Sharma, Naman, Iqra Sheikh, Harshit Chitransh, Aditya Shandily, Shivam Tiwari, Advocates