1. Writ petition seeking protection of national biodiversity and directions to challenge the international patenting of traditional rice varieties. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1998 Supreme(SC) 1147
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A. S. Anand, CJI., M. Srinivasan, V. N. Khare, JJ.
RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ECOLOGY AND OTHERS, PETITIONERS
Versus
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 212 of 1998,
decided on November 16, 1998.
Important Points
A writ petition may be disposed of as settled if the government demonstrates it is taking concrete legislative and administrative steps to address grievances regarding biodiversity protection and the challenging of foreign patents on traditional varieties.
Subject
Constitutional Law - Environmental Law
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Convention on Biological Diversity - Biodiversity Act - Geographical Indicators Act - Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Protection Bill - Patents Act - Protection of biodiversity and challenging foreign patents on traditional rice varieties - Petitioners sought directions to protect biodiversity and challenge the patenting of a specific rice variety in foreign forums - Government informed the Court that legislation regarding biodiversity and geographical indicators is being finalized, a bill for plant varieties and farmers' rights is ready for introduction in the legislature, and amendments to the patents act are under consideration - Government also stated that steps are being taken to challenge the grant of the patent. (Paras 1-3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to protect the biodiversity of the country in accordance with international conventions and to challenge the patenting of a specific traditional rice variety before a foreign patent office and an international trade body.
Findings of Court:
The government representative submitted that the Biodiversity Act and the Geographical Indicators Act are being finalized, the Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Protection Bill is ready for introduction in the legislature, and amendments to the Patents Act are under consideration. Furthermore, steps have been taken to challenge the grant of the patent for the rice variety.
Issues: Whether the government had taken sufficient steps to protect the country's biodiversity and challenge the patenting of a traditional rice variety in foreign jurisdictions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that since the government is actively taking legislative and administrative measures to protect national interests and biodiversity, the purpose of the petition has been served.
Result: The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as settled and consigned to record.
Facts of the case:
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to protect the biodiversity of the country in accordance with international conventions and to challenge the patenting of a specific traditional rice variety before a foreign patent office and an international trade body.
Findings of Court:
The government representative submitted that the Biodiversity Act and the Geographical Indicators Act are being finalized, the Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Protection Bill is ready for introduction in the legislature, and amendments to the Patents Act are under consideration. Furthermore, steps have been taken to challenge the grant of the patent for the rice variety.
Issues: Whether the government had taken sufficient steps to protect the country's biodiversity and challenge the patenting of a traditional rice variety in foreign jurisdictions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that since the government is actively taking legislative and administrative measures to protect national interests and biodiversity, the purpose of the petition has been served.
Result: The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as settled and consigned to record.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioners sought biodiversity protection and patent challenges; Government contended that legislative frameworks and administrative actions were already being implemented to protect national interests. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 )
3. The government is actively finalizing legislation on biodiversity, geographical indications, and plant variety protection, alongside considering amendments to the Patents Act. (Para 3 )
4. A writ petition may be disposed of as settled if the government's legislative and administrative actions effectively address the petitioners' grievances. (Para 4 , 5 )
5. Writ petition disposed of as settled. (Para 5 )
6. How can a state protect its biodiversity and traditional knowledge from foreign patenting?
A state can implement a comprehensive legal framework including biodiversity legislation, geographical indicators acts, plant variety and farmers' rights protection bills, and amendments to the Patents Act. (Para 3 )
7. Under what circumstances is a writ petition disposed of as settled?
A writ petition is disposed of as settled when the government's actions and proposed legislations satisfy the purpose of the petition, leading the petitioners to concede that further judicial intervention is unnecessary. (Para 4 , 5 )
ORDER
1. Through this Writ Petition, the petitioners have brought to the notice of this Court certain facts and circumstances and pleaded the need to protect the biodiversity of the country and also sought a direction to the Union of India to challenge the patenting of "Basmati rice" in appropriate forums. The following prayers are made in the writ petition :
"The petitioners, therefore, pray that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Honble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or the directions of like nature to the respondents to :
(i) take action to protect the biodiversity of our country in conformity with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and such other Conventions for protection of the biodiversity;
(ii) challenge the patenting of Basmati rice, if required, in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and/or before the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) created under the World Trade Organisation (WTO)."
2. On 17-4-1998, this Court directed that a copy of the writ petition be served on the learned Attorney General of India, who was requested to examine the matter and inform the Court of the steps which the Government of India proposed to take in the matter. On 13-7-1998, the learned Attorney General was present in response to the notice and submitted that a draft outline of the proposed biodiversity legislation had been circulated and comments had also been received from various quarters. It was also submitted by the learned Attorney General that insofar as the patent of "Basmati rice" is concerned, the Government of India had already taken various steps in the matter to challenge the grant of patent. At the request of the learned Attorney General, we had adjourned the matter for four months.
3. On the matter coming up before us today, learned Attorney General submits that after taking all aspects into consideration and inviting suggestions, two legislations - "the Biodiversity Act " and "the Geographical Indicators Act " are in the process of finalisation for being introduced in Parliament. It is further stated that a Bill titled "Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Protection Bill" has already been finalised and is likely to be introduced in Parliament during the winter session. According to the learned Attorney General, the various steps required for the amendment of the Patents Act are also under consideration of the Government. The learned Attorney General submits that the Government of India is fully alive to the situation and its gravity and is taking all necessary steps to protect the interest of the nation.
4. In view of the statement made by the learned Attorney General, Ms. Indira Jaising, learned counsel for the petitioners, rightly submits that the purpose for which the petitioners had moved this Court has been served by activising the Government to take appropriate steps and nothing more at this stage is required to be considered insofar as the writ petition is concerned and that the same may be disposed of as settled.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as settled and consigned to record.
