Site navigation

In Divya Pharmacy v. Union of India (Uttarakhand High Court, 2018), the petitioner, an Indian company…

Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held that the "SBB has got powers to demand Fair and Equitable Benefit Sharing from the petitioner", and dismissed the writ petition. The court…

Choose your answer

In Divya Pharmacy v. Union of India (Uttarakhand High Court, 2018), the petitioner, an Indian company making ayurvedic products, challenged a State Biodiversity Board's demand for a contribution towards fair and equitable benefit sharing. The High Court held that

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer B

Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia held that the "SBB has got powers to demand Fair and Equitable Benefit Sharing from the petitioner", and dismissed the writ petition. The court refused to confine benefit sharing to foreign entities, because that would defeat the purpose of the Act. The 2023 amendment now expressly lets State Boards determine benefit sharing under section 23(ba).

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic