According to World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) a geographical indication (GI) is “a sign used on products that have a specific geographical origin and possess qualities or a reputation that are due to that origin”. Article 22.1 of the TRIPS Agreement defines GI as “indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a country, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin”.
On a bare reading of the aforementioned definitions, it can be chalked out that in order to be a GI, a product must originate from a given place, and that there should be a nexus between the product and its origin. A few GIs in India include Darjeeling Tea, Mahabaleshwar Strawberry, Bikaneri Bhujia, Banarasi Saris etc.. Recently, the tussle between Bengal and Odisha over GI tag on “rosogulla” made headlines. Ultimately, the GI tag for “Banglar Rosogulla” was granted to West Bengal. The author, in this write-up has traced the journey of this tussle and the granting of GI tag. Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an international legal agreement between WTO nations.
The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999
In order to understand the tussle between West Bengal and Odisha over GI tag on “rosogulla”, the author shall be highlighting the concerned provisions of the GI Act, 1999. For a GI to be granted by the GI Registry, the product should be in conformity with the provisions of Section 11(2) of the GI Act. The application filed under the provisions of Section 11(1) of the Act should provide as to how the GI originates from the said territory “in respect of specific quality, reputation or other characteristics” which are due to the geographics, environment with its inherent natural and human factors. The application should also include the particulars of the GI. Section 14 of the Act lays down grounds for “opposition to registration” of the GI tag. It provides for the time-period within which any person shall give notice of opposition of the proposed GI to the Registrar. Section 14(3) provides that the application might file a counter-statement to the Registrar. The onus to weigh the evidence and arrive at a conclusion lies with the Registrar. If the registration of the GI is accepted by the Registrar, by virtue of Section 16(2), a certificate with the seal of Geographical Indication Registry is issued to each of the applicant and authorized users of the GI. The Act, by virtue of Section 18, mandates a period of ten years validity period for the tag from the date of grant of the tag. The tag, however, can be renewed from time to time. The primary reason for the skirmish between West Bengal and Odisha lies in Section 21 of the Act. This provision provides that the exclusive right to profitably exploit the GI tag shall vest only with the authorized users and registered proprietors of the tag.
West Bengal v. Odisha: The Squabble over “Rosogulla”
The dispute over the origin of the sweet between the neighbouring states of Odisha and West Bengal began in 2015 with the state of Odisha declaring to celebrate “Rosogulla Diwas”. The skirmish between the states turned bitter when Odisha’s Science and Technology Minister set up multiple committees to unearth the origin of the dish. Eventually, the Odia government claimed that the sweet originated in 13th century in the city of Puri when Lord Jagannath offered it to Lakshmi. West Bengal, on the other hand, filed a counter-claim contending that “rosogulla” was invented by a confectioner called Nabin Chandra Das. In addition to this, the West Bengal government filed a court application in tandem along with an application for a geographical indicator tag for “Banglar Rosogulla”. This application was filed by the Directorate of Food Processing Industries of West Bengal. In 2017, the state of West Bengal was granted the certificate for “Banglar Rosogulla”, thereby ending the squabble between the states. The Application states that the “Banglar Rasogulla” is a syrupy dessert made from pure chhana, and that it is produced by more than 1 lakh confectioners in the state of West Bengal.
Conclusion
Essentially the squabble over GI is because of the GI-granted products assuming a competitive advantage over other similar goods.[i] On giving a cursory look at the entire “Bengal v. Odisha” scenario, it seems as if Odisha has lost the opportunity to be granted GI on “rosogulla”. However, it needs to be understood that “rosogulla” is a generic term. Moreover, the state of West Bengal has been granted GI tag only for the “Banglar Rosogulla”. This leaves room for other forms of rosogulla to be granted GI. Odisha is in process of obtaining a GI tag for the “Odishara Rasagolla” which has been offered at Jagannath Temple as a part of religious rituals. Therefore, eventually, this entire scenario waters down to the fact that there was in actuality no tussle between the states since both states have different forms of rasogulla. Most importantly, the debate is not about sentiments of Oria and Bengalis. Granting of GI tag shall mean manifold increase in profit margin for vendors in both the states.