Deemed registration under a statute cannot be created by guideline without statutory basis; imported formulations need physical sample testing safeguards.

The Insecticides Act, 1968 does not confer power on the Registration Committee to create a deemed registration regime for imported formulations by guideline, because a statutory body cannot generate a substantive entitlement not found in the parent Act. The article also notes that import permissions must be accompanied by actual physical samples of the technical grade for laboratory testing on chemical composition, bioefficacy and human safety, so that public safety and non-discrimination concerns are addressed within the statutory framework. On that basis, deemed registration was treated as unsustainable and continued relief was restrained pending final hearing or fresh guidelines.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the Registration Committee could evolve a policy of deemed registration for imported formulations without a corresponding statutory basis; (ii) whether imported formulations must also undergo testing of the technical grade through actual physical samples to address safety, bioefficacy and discrimination concerns.

Issue (i): Whether the Registration Committee could evolve a policy of deemed registration for imported formulations without a corresponding statutory basis.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Insecticides Act, 1968 provides for registration, provisional registration and a separate mechanism for me-too registration, but it does not confer any express power to create a deemed registration regime. The Committee, being a statutory creature, may regulate its procedure, but it cannot by guideline create a substantive entitlement that the Act does not contemplate. A procedure evolved for convenience cannot override the parent statute or be used indirectly to achieve what cannot be done directly.

Conclusion: The policy of deemed registration was held unsustainable and could not be continued.

Issue (ii): Whether imported formulations must also undergo testing of the technical grade through actual physical samples to address safety, bioefficacy and discrimination concerns.

Analysis: The decision proceeded on the basis that public safety, bioefficacy and environmental protection remain central to the regulatory scheme. The apprehension that importers were being treated more favourably was addressed by recording the assurance that each consignment would be accompanied by actual physical samples of the technical grade, which would be subjected to laboratory scrutiny on parameters such as chemical composition, bioefficacy and human safety, comparable to the rigours applicable to indigenous manufacturers. On that basis, the alleged discrimination was treated as sufficiently neutralised for the interim stage.

Conclusion: Imported formulations were required to be accompanied by physical samples of the technical grade for testing, and equal treatment safeguards were directed.

Final Conclusion: The interim relief was vacated and modified, the civil applications were allowed to that extent, and further grant of deemed registration was restrained pending final hearing or fresh governmental guidelines.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory committee cannot create a substantive regulatory regime by guideline when the parent Act provides no such power, and interim regulatory permissions affecting public safety may be sustained only if supported by actual testing safeguards and non-discriminatory treatment within the statutory framework.

---