Pharmabiz
 

State FDA officials oppose appointment of IAS officer as commissioner

Kavita Tate, MumbaiThursday, November 24, 2005, 08:00 Hrs  [IST]

The Maharashtra Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) officers association has taken serious objection to the practice of appointment of IAS or IPS officers as Commissioner of State FDA. The officers feel that provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1945 are clear about the appointment of technically qualified person to head the Drugs Control Organisation. “Pharmaceutical Inquiry Committee has clearly expressed that Drugs Control Organisation must be headed by a full time drug controller having technical knowledge of pharmaceutical industry. Till 1980, the drug control department was headed by a technically qualified person. Only after the J.J hospital tragedy, Justice Lentin recommended that an IAS officer should head FDA. But this recommendation was in the context of the exceptional circumstances. The verdict should be considered against system failure and not against the technically qualified future generation officers. It cannot be considered a permanent measure or recommendation,” said one of the FDA joint commissioners. In 1988, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1945 was amended and it was prescribed that a technically qualified person should head the Drugs Control Organisation. The amendment was effected in spite of the Lentin commission recommendation. This is substantiated by views expressed by the secretary, Health, Government of India at 28th Drugs Consultative Committee. Speaking to Pharmabiz, FDA officials said that all the divisions in FDA are headed by full time technically qualified joint commissioners. They are effectively and efficiently performing their tasks. There is no reason why one of them cannot shoulder the responsibility of the post of commissioner. The appointment of joint commissioners (H.Q) as controlling authority is just to show the compliance to the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act on paper. In reality, the commissioner with no technical qualification acts as a de- facto controlling authority. This violates the spirit of Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1945.

 
[Close]