Last month, tobacco companies shut down production in protest against requirements that 85% of a cigarette pack's surface be covered in health warnings, up from 20%.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stay the Centre's regulations on 85 % pictorial warnings on tobacco products and directed the tobacco industry to adhere to rules requiring stringent health warnings on cigarette packs.
A bench headed by Justice PC Ghosh also directed that all petitions challenging the rule in various courts to be transferred and heard afresh by the Karnataka high court within eight weeks. The court said in public interest, tobacco companies should act responsibly, adding any awareness created on the issue would help curb the ill-effects of tobacco.
Last month, Indian tobacco companies, some backed by foreign "Big Tobacco", shut down production in protest against requirements that 85 % of a cigarette pack's surface be covered in health warnings, up from 20%.
A notification by the Union Health Ministry for implementation of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labeling) Amendment Rules, 2008 (COTPA came into force on April 1.It mandated increasing the size of health warning to 85 % up from the current 20 % of the principal display area on packets of tobacco products.
When the apex court was told that Dharwad bench of the Karnataka High Court has stayed the implementation of the new rules, it said that any stay granted by any court shall not be implemented until the final order is passed by Principal Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Bengaluru.
"We request all the petitioners that till the disposal of matters by the Karnataka High Court, it will be the endeavour of all the parties to implement the rules whatever as amended. This order will not stand in the way of the Karnataka High Court deciding the matter on merit," the court said.
Twenty seven cases filed by tobacco companies against the pictorial rule are pending in various high courts – Delhi, Bombay, Karnataka and Gujarat.
Among various associations, Karnataka Beedi Industry Association had approached the Supreme Court, challenging the regulation, saying that it would bring the industry to a "grinding halt" and "cause grave and irreparable harm and loss".
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "tobacco")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}