The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Ministry of Ayush should set up a dashboard so that details about complaints filed on misleading advertisements and progress made on them can be made available to the consumers.

The apex court had earlier highlighted the aspect of misleading advertisements being published or displayed in media contrary to the provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 and the rules, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta was hearing a plea filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) alleging a smear campaign by Patanjali Ayurved Ltd against the Covid vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine.

The bench noted that the lack of proper data regarding action taken on the complaints received leaves the consumers helpless and in the dark.

"The Ministry of Ayush must set up a dashboard citing complaints received... so that the data comes in the public domain," the bench observed.

It added that the data can also help in addressing the issue of prosecution under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

The top court was informed that in several states, a number of complaints regarding misleading advertisements were forwarded to other states as the firms manufacturing those products were based there.

The bench noted that the number of complaints made by the consumers, which was over 2,500 earlier, has gone down to only around 130 and the main reason appears to be that the grievance redressal mechanism for dealing with such complaints has not been properly publicised.

It asked the ministry concerned to look into this issue and file an affidavit within two weeks.

The apex court bench also dealt with the aspect concerning manufacturing licences of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy.

The Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) on April 15 issued an order suspending the manufacturing licences of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy.

However, the state licensing authority later filed an additional affidavit in the apex court stating the suspension order has been cancelled following a report by a high-level committee which examined the grievances of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the wake of the row.

On May 17, it said the operation of the April 15 order was paused and the suspension order was cancelled on July 1.

During the hearing on Tuesday, the counsel appearing for the IMA told the apex court bench about the cancellation of the suspension order.

"What is the status today?" the bench asked.

The counsel appearing for Uttarakhand said that after the July 1 order, a fresh notice was issued to Patanjali and the SLA received a reply from Patanjali on July 19.

When the state's counsel said they have sought legal opinion in the matter, the bench asked, "How much time do you need to wrap up the matter after hearing them?".

When the counsel said they needed three to four weeks, the bench asked, "Why?". It told the state to pass an order pursuant to the show cause notice before the next date of hearing and communicate the same to Patanjali.

It also dealt with the issue related to its May 7 directive, which said that before an advertisement was printed, aired or displayed, a self-declaration shall be submitted by the advertiser or advertising agency on the lines contemplated in Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994.

Rule 7 of the 1994 rules deals with the advertisement code and stipulates that advertisements carried in the cable service shall be designed to be in conformity with the laws and should not offend the morality, decency and religious susceptibilities of the subscribers.

The top court on May 7 said self-declaration shall be uploaded by the advertiser or advertising agency on the 'Broadcast Sewa Portal' run under the aegis of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

During the hearing on Tuesday, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj informed the bench that the ministry had convened a meeting of all stakeholders on June 30 in which 40-odd parties participated to discuss the issue.

He said another meeting was held in July and some time was needed to collate all the information and give recommendations. The bench granted two weeks to the ministry to do the needful.

When Nataraj said some stakeholders have sought more time to give suggestions, the bench said, "They have to hurry up and pull up their socks." On May 14, the apex court reserved its order on the contempt notice issued to yoga guru Ramdev, his aide Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the misleading advertisements case.

Patanjali Ayurved Ltd assured the top court on November 21 last year that it will not violate any law, especially those relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it.

It had also assured the bench that "no casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine will be released to the media in any form".

The top court had said Patanjali Ayurved Ltd is "bound down to such assurance".

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.