The ayurvedic manufacturers from Vidarbha region of Maharashtra are planning to seek clarity from the state biodiversity board over serving of notices under section 7 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The said section under the Act stipulates intimating Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board (MSBB) in a prescribed format on the plant-based raw material sourced or acquired by the manufacturer along with a prescribed fee of Rs. 5000.

According to Section 7 and 24 (2) of the Act, organisations extracting plant based material for commercial purpose without intimation to MSBB are liable under Section 55 (2) of the Act and shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend up to three years with fine or five years with fine or both.  The notice served states that it is required to share benefit among concerned Biodiversity Management Committees of the state under direction from MSBB.

Questions a manufacturer referring to the notice, "Why is the manufacturer held accountable or liable for the raw material sourced by the supplier or the trader when the details and information of the source of raw material lies with the supplier exclusively. Besides this, licence fee costs only Rs. 600 for three years and product fee Rs. 100. A registration fee of Rs. 5000 defies all logic”.

"We are planning to approach the authorities on this in consultation with Ayurvedic Drug Manufacturers Association (ADMA)," he added.

This move comes in the wake of National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) through its state biodiversity board set up in Maharashtra started issuing notices to the manufacturers not registered with them, directing them to do so at the earliest.

The notice states that the application in Form I under Rule 17 of Maharashtra Biological Diversity Rules, 2008 is available on website www.maharashtrabiodiversityboard.gov.in which can be downloaded. You are requested to apply in aforesaid Form -I and send it to the MSBB accompanied with a fee of Rs. 5,000 in the form of a demand draft drawn in favour of "The Member Secretary MSBB", payable at Nagpur.

It is also required to furnish information like name and address of the company, name of panchayat or Nagar Palika from where raw material has been acquired, name and quantity of biological resources used annually, area and annual production (year wise) and annual gross turn over (gross revenue).

Under Section 56 of the Act, it is stated that if any person contravenes any direction given or order made by the Central Government, the State Government, the National Biodiversity Act or the State Biodiversity Board for which no punishment has been separately provided under this act, he shall be punished with a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees and in case of a second or subsequent offence, with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees and in case of continuous contravention with additional fine which may extend to two lakh rupees everyday during which the default continues.   

The Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani (ASU) industry had also expressed discontentment in the past over the creation of separate biodiversity board in each state under the Biodiversity Act, stating that it is leading to a lot of confusion among the ASU manufacturers, further complicating the process of acquiring plant raw materials from the forest.

The manufacturers had voiced their concern saying that having a centralised registration process under the Act is more feasible for the industry than state wise registration mainly because the manufacturers will have to register themselves with almost all the key states that produce medicinal plants and raw materials, in case there is a shortage of the same in their respective state. This process, according to them, is going to be not only cumbersome but also an expensive affair for the industry.