Chennai: Pointing out that damaging the reputation and goodwill of private manufacturers in general cannot be permitted, the Madras high court on Monday restrained the Tamil Nadu Milk and Dairy Development Minister K.T.Rajenthira Bhalaji from issuing any disparaging statements against private manufacturers of dairy and milk products in general.
"If there is substantial material to prove adulteration, he should specify the name of the private company which indulged in such adulteration and also produce necessary documents to substantiate his charge. This would allay the fear among the general public", said Justice C.V. Karthikeyan while passing interim orders on a suit filed by Hatsun Agro Products, Dodla Dairy and Vijay Dairy and Farm Products, leading milk and dairy products manufacturing and marketing private companies.
The judge posted to July 28 further hearing of the suit, which also sought a direction to Minister K.T. Rajenthira Bhalaji, to pay Rs 1 crore each as damages for accusing private companies of adulterating milk with noxious chemicals including formaldehyde.
The three companies also sought to restrain the minister from making any statements or remarks and insinuations to the media directly disparaging the plaintiffs' milk or milk products manufactured and marketed by them.
In his order, the judge said even though it was fairly conceded by the senior counsels, who appeared for all the three plaintiffs that the minister had not specifically named the three plaintiffs companies, it was still a statement in the press which was sufficient to damage the reputation and the goodwill of the plaintiffs. It has also caused fear in the society.
It was also stated that none of the statements have been specifically substantiated.
The injunction was sought for restraining the respondent (minister) from making any statement or remarks or insinuations. "I would modify the relief sought for by the applicants by stating that the respondent-minister should not issue any disparaging press statements or address reporters indirectly or directly disparaging privately manufactured dairy products or milk products. If there is substantial material to prove adulteration, he should specify the name of the private company which indulged in such adulteration and also produce necessary documents to substantiate his charge. This direction would ensure that the minister makes statements which are substantiated and which can also be rebutted by the affected companies, which may or may not include the applicants herein. It is hoped that the respondent (minister) would strictly adhere to the observations made above till July 28", the judge added.
According to the plaintiffs, the minister was accusing them of adulterating milk with noxious chemicals. The statements given by the Minister were meant to create a sense of fear and panic in the minds of the plaintiffs' consumers. The Minister claimed to have sent samples of milk to various laboratories which in fact later turned out to be a false statement. Further, he has alleged private companies were influencing laboratories not to accept samples. This fear campaign of the minister stood exposed when the Central Lab at Pune admitted that it had not received any sample from State in the recent past.
The Minister had not sent any sample for testing to any lab, but went on accusing private companies of adulterating milk with noxious chemicals including formaldehyde etc., they added.
