Disposed

Aurea Biolabs (P) Ltd. v. National Biodiversity Authority

Kerala HC23 Jan 2023WP(C)/255/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the National Biodiversity Authority's inaction on a representation (Ext.P5). The court directed the Authority to consider the representation on or before a specified date or within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.11.2022 within two months from the date of receipt of this judgment, after providing a notice of hearing.

Aurea Biolabs (P) Ltd. Vs National Biodiversity Authority — Kerala HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶3

MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 3RD MAGHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 255 OF 2023

¶4

PETITIONER

¶5

AUREA BIOLABS (P) LTD.
PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
COCHIN, KERALA, INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR SMT. MARIAM GEORGE
, PIN - 682036
BY ADVS.
ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
S.SREEDEV
RONY JOSE
LEO LUKOSE
CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL
KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
DERICK MATHAI SAJI

¶6

RESPONDENT:

¶7

NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY AUTHORITY
TICEL, BIOPARK, CSIR ROAD, TARAMANI,
CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU-600113
REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

¶8

SRI.SUVIN R.MENON- CGC

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

WP(C) NO. 255 OF 2023 2

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

The petitioner challenges the inaction on the part of the respondent-National Biodiversity Authority in considering Ext.P5 representation. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has applied for approval as per Ext.P1 under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The approval was granted. However, as per Ext.P2, the authority is insisting for Access and Benefit Sharing Agreement (for short ABS Agreement).

¶13

According to the petitioner, ABS Agreement is not required for many reasons and specifically for the reason that the product that is sought for approval is a value-added product derived from turmeric. Any how, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 representation before the respondent seeking the said relief, which is pending consideration and seeks only a direction for early termination of the same.

¶14

WP(C) NO. 255 OF 2023 3

¶15

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Leo Lukose and the learned Central Government Counsel Sri.Surin R.Menon, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation dated 23.11.2022 at the earliest and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing a notice of hearing to the petitioner.

¶16

sd/-

¶17

SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE

¶18

hmh

¶19

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 255/2023

¶20

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶21

Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
05.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27.10.2022
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 09.11.2022
FORWARDED TO THE RESPONDENT BY THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 14.11.2022
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
23.11.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT ACCESS AND
BENEFIT SHARING AGREEMENT RECEIVED BY
THE PETITIONER FROM ITS AGENT.
Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
07.04.2016 NUMBERED AS S.O. 1352(E)
ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT,
FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE.
RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS : NIL

Aurea Biolabs (P) Ltd. v. National Biodiversity Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aurea Biolabs (P) Ltd. v. National Biodiversity Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jose Sanal, Vs the District Collector

Anitha Baiju, Vs the District Collector

Abdul Vahid Vs the Principal, Arts and Science College

Alex Vrghese Vs Union of India

Akhil J Jacob Vs the Deputy Tahsildar

Antech Construction Company Vs State of Kerala