The DRAP drug pricing policy that sets and enforces maximum retail prices (MRPs)—the ceiling prices pharmacies may charge—is under review at the Islamabad High Court after a manufacturer disputed how the rules were applied to one of its products.
M/s Brookes Pharmaceuticals, through Advocate Muhammad Zeeshan Akhtar, has filed a constitutional petition under Article 199. It contests DRAP’s move to treat Pyodine Surgical Scrub Solution 7.5% (60ml), which contains Povidone-Iodine, under the same price framework used for Povidone-Iodine 10% solution. The company argues the scrub has a different concentration, formulation and therapeutic purpose, so the regulatory link is not automatic.
What the company is challenging
The petition targets an Explanation Letter dated 16 September 2026 and what Brookes describes as later coercive steps: seizure of stock and a ban on disposing of the product. Brookes says the gap between a 10% Povidone-Iodine solution and a 7.5% surgical scrub matters for both regulation and pricing. It also asks whether sharing an active ingredient with a product on the National Essential Medicines List (NEML)—the official list of priority medicines—is enough on its own to place a product under an MRP.
The firm further disputes whether provisions of the Drug Pricing Policy, 2018 can be used in this dispute when it is contested that the product even falls under that framework. It challenges the legal basis for seizure and disposal restrictions under Sections 18 and 19 of the Drugs Act, 1976—the main law governing medicines—and cites constitutional protections under Articles 4, 10-A and 18, saying the actions lack lawful authority and hurt legitimate business.
What the Islamabad High Court has ordered
The IHC has held that the arguments need examination, especially whether the scrub sits inside the rules that fix and enforce MRPs. Judges have flagged the legal weight of the difference between the 10% solution and the 7.5% surgical scrub and have told DRAP and the other respondents to file comments and a statement with the relevant record on product classification, the applicable price, the seizure process and any approval or continuation of the disposal ban.
A competent DRAP officer must also explain the statutory reason for keeping the seizure and disposal curb in place while the alleged violation is still being decided. Interim relief has been deferred until the respondents’ position is on record. In the meantime, the court has ordered that seized stock be held under prescribed storage conditions so quality and integrity are not damaged during the case.
Why the DRAP MRP mechanism matters
At issue is how far the DRAP drug pricing policy and its MRP mechanism can stretch from one listed or regulated formulation to another product that uses the same active ingredient but differs in strength and use. The court’s request for the classification and price record, and for a clear legal justification of continued seizure, places that mechanism under formal judicial scrutiny without yet deciding who is right.
Aasan alfaaz mein
Islamabad High Court ne DRAP se record mangaa hai ke Pyodine Surgical Scrub 7.5% par price control kaise lagaaya gaya. Company kehti hai yeh scrub 10% solution se alag hai, is liye wohi MRP nahi chal sakta. Abhi faisla nahi hua; qabza kiya hua stock theek tareeqe se store karna hoga. Aam logon ke liye yeh case dawai ki qemat ke qanooni andaaz ko samajhne ka hai, na ke koi naya price list.
