The Department of Pharmaceuticals (DoP) has rejected the review application filed by Ranbaxy Laboratories against the fixation/revision of ceiling prices of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride injection 200 mg/100 ml by the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA).

“The point raised by the petitioner has no merit and therefore, the review petition deserves to be rejected,” the DoP order said.

The NPPA had earlier vide price fixation Order S.O. No. 2095 (E) dt. 20.8.2014 fixed/revised ceiling price of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride injection 200 mg/100 ml under DPCO, 2013.

Aggrieved by the notification, Ranbaxy submitted review application dated 18.9.2014 under para.31 of DPCO, 2013 for the review of NPPA price fixation Order S.O.No. 2095 (E) dt. 20.8.2014 fixing ceiling price of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride injection 200 mg/100 ml under DPCO, 2013.

In the review application, the petitioner mentioned that the price of ciprofloxacin hydrochloride injection 200 mg/100 ml. was fixed vide NPPA’s gazette notification S.O. No. 2095(E) dt. 20.8.2014 is incorrect as the same supersedes the price as had been provided in the nonexistent notification.  He further submitted that NPPA had vide SO No.1157 (E) dt. 28.4.2014 fixed the price for the formulation in question at Re.0.16 per ml. Subsequently, NPPA in supersession of notification No. 1157 dt. 28.4.2014 issued another notification S.O.No. 1784 dt. 10.7.2014 and the per ml. ceiling price was fixed at Rs. 0.27. On 11.7.2014 NPPA vide SO Notification No. 1823 dt. 11.7.2014 had withdrawn notification No. 1784 dt. 10.7.2014.

The petitioner further mentioned that after withdrawal of notification dt.10.7.2014 by NPPA on 11.7.14, no price notification existed and therefore they are free to sell the formulation at any price.  

The NPPA on its part mentioned that while issuing notification No. 1784 dt. 10.7.2014 an error was noticed and, therefore, that notification was withdrawn on 11.7.2014. Therefore, the prices notified by SO No.1157(E) dt.28.4.2014 remain effective.

After hearing both the parties, the reviewing authority DoP observed that the sequence of events clearly shows that on 11.7.2014 the notification dt. 28.4.2014 was not withdrawn. The notification dt. 10.7.2014 superseding notification of 28.4.2014 itself has been withdrawn. The withdrawal effect is total i.e. the price as well as the superseding effect. The notification dt. 28.4.2014 will remain operational. Therefore the notification dt. 28.4.2014 was in existence till 20th August 2014 when the prices were revised from Rs. 0.16 to Rs. 0.17 per ml.

To a specific query during the review hearing regarding the price at which the formulation is being sold by the company from 28.4.2014 till date of hearing the company did not specify the price at which the formulation is being sold by them i.e. MRP. The company had stated that they are maintaining the status quo of DPCO 1995 price wherein they were granted stay.  Further the company did not give any supporting documents which were promised by them during the personal hearing. This shows intention of the company to overcharge the consumers by taking plea of Court stay which was never granted to them under DPCO 2013 and also non-existence of any price notification.

After hearing both the parties, the DoP ordered, “The point raised by the petitioner has no merit and therefore, the review petition deserves to be rejected. NPPA to examine the issue of overcharging by the company under DPCO, 2013 and take further action in consultation with Ministry of Law”.