The Supreme Court of India has granted a 6-month extension of the ban on non-iodized salt, but the justices urged the Legislature to enact a more permanent policy, warning: "if it fails to take any action within the expiry of six months from today, Rule 44-I [the ban on non-iodized salt] shall cease to operate."

"The apex court verdict came on a batch of petitions by several NGOs representing consumers, salt producers, medical experts and academics challenging the constitutional validity of the ban and the justification of its grounds.

"‘We therefore reject the contention that the provision placing a ban on sale of non-iodized salt for human consumption, resulting in compulsory intake of iodized salt, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 or injurious to the health of general populace and therefore violative of Article 21 (of the constitution).’

"‘The use of common salt (non-iodized salt) for industrial and commercial use has not been prohibited. The ban operates only in regard to use of common salt for human consumption. There is also no material to show that any monopoly is sought to be created in favour of a chosen few companies or MNCs. In the circumstances, the contention that Article 19(1) (g) is violated is liable to be rejected,’ the judgment said."