RonAgnew292842 at 12:25, 25 March 2026

2026-03-25T12:25:32Z

New page

{{short description|Government agency under Indian Ministry of Commerce and Industry}}
{{AI-generated|date=September 2025}}
{{more citations needed|date=June 2012}}
{{Use Indian English|date=February 2017}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2020}}
{{Infobox government agency
| name = Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks
| seal =
| logo = Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, Govt of India.png
| logo_caption =
| formed =
| jurisdiction = [[Government of India]]
| headquarters = [[Delhi, India]]
| employees =
| budget =
| chief1_name = Shri. Unnat P. Pandit
| chief1_position = Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks
| chief2_name = Shri. Hardev Karar
| chief2_position = Senior Joint Controller of Patents & Designs & Head of Office
| chief3_name = Shri. N R Meena
| chief3_position = Senior Joint Controller of Patents & Designs & Head of Office, Delhi
| chief4_name = Shri. N K Mohanty
| chief4_position = Senior Joint Controller of Patents & Designs
| chief5_name =
| chief5_position =
| chief6_name =
| chief6_position =
| chief7_name =
| chief7_position =
| chief8_name =
| chief8_position =
| chief9_name =
| chief9_position =
| parent_department = [[Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT)|Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade]]
| website = https://ipindia.gov.in
}}

The '''Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks''' '''(CGPDTM)''' generally known as the '''Indian Patent Office,''' is an agency under the [[Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT)|Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade]] which administers the Indian law of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://ipindia.nic.in/|title=Official website of Intellectual Property India|website=ipindia.nic.in|access-date=2020-02-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://dipp.gov.in/|title=Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade {{!}} MoCI {{!}} GoI {{!}} Ministry of Commerce and Industry {{!}} GOI|website=dipp.gov.in|access-date=2020-02-27|archive-date=30 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210730092936/https://dipp.gov.in/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

==History==
===Foundation===
On 28 February 1856, the Government of India promulgated legislation to grant what was then termed as "exclusive privileges for the encouragement of inventions of new manufactures". On 3 March 1856, a civil engineer, George Alfred DePenning of 7, Grant's Lane, Calcutta petitioned the Government of India for grant of exclusive privileges for his invention — "An Efficient Punkah Pulling Machine". On 2 September, DePenning, submitted the Specifications for his invention along with drawings to illustrate its working. These were accepted and the invention was granted the first ever Intellectual Property protection in India.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://anilbme.blogspot.in/2009/07/first-patent-application-in-india-guess.html|title= First patent|date= 5 July 2009}}</ref>

===Amendments to the Patents Act & Rules===
Amendments (in 1999, 2002, 2005) were necessitated by India's obligations under [[TRIPS]], allowing product patents in drugs and chemicals. A pre-grant representation in addition to the existing post-grant opposition has been re-introduced.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abiaids.org.br/_img/media/Intellectual_Property_internet.pdf|title =Intellectual Property Rights and Access to ARV Medicines:Civil Society Resistance in the Global South, See Page 49}}</ref> A provision of later amendments was on [[software patent]]-ability, which was later withdrawn in another amendment in 2005. The amendment in 2012<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/IPORule/1_20_1_patent-amendment-rules-2012.pdf|title=Patent rules amendment 2012}}</ref> focused on change in marks of Patent Agent Examination.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://spicyip.com/2012/11/patent-agent-examination-dipp-notifies.html|title=DIPP notifies changes in the patent agent exam rules|date=7 November 2012 }}</ref>

Indian Patent Rules were amended in 2003, 2005, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2019 and 2020. The 2006 amendment of rules introduced reduced time lines and a fee structure based on specification size and number of claims, in addition to a basic fee. Indian Patent amendment rules 2012 was for amendments in criteria for patent agent exam qualification. Gazette Notification of Patent (Amendments) Rules 2013 has made necessary provisions for recognizing Patent office as Examining authority and Searching authority<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://ipindiaservices.gov.in/isaweb/about.html|title=Intellectual Property of India- ISA, IPEA|website=ipindiaservices.gov.in|access-date=2019-03-02}}</ref> on international level for filing, searching and examination of patent along with necessary fees. Patent amendment rules 2014 introduced a third category of applicant for small entities and revised the basic fee for filing a patent application.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/IPORule/1_8_1_patent-amendment-rules-2014.pdf|title=Patent Amendment Rule 2014}}</ref> Patent amendment rule 2016 implemented on 16 May 2016, and introduced such as electronic communication to applicant/agent, and applicant can withdrawn their application using Form-29, and majorly introduced for the expedited examination for startup companies, and the timeline to put the grant of applicant has been reduced from 12 months to 6 months. In addition, video conference has been introduced for hearing the patent matters.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/IPORule/1_42_1_Patent__Amendment_Rules_2016_16May2016.pdf|title=Patent Amendment Rule 2016}}</ref> Patent amendment rules 2019 introduced a patent agent shall submit all documents only by electronic transmission duly authenticated. Further, fee reductions for small entity, and fast track examination for specific applicants including female were introduced in 2019.<ref>{{Cite web |date= |title=Trademark Amendment Rules 2019 |url=https://ipindia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/News/569_1_The_Patent_Amendment_Rules_2019_.pdf |access-date= |website=ipindia.gov.in}}</ref>

==Activities==
===Patent administration===
[[File:Trends in Indian patents, 1997–2013, The number of biotech patents has doubled in a decade.svg|thumb|Trends in Indian patents, 1997–2013, The number of [[biotech]] patents has doubled in a decade.]]

The CGPDTM reports to the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) under the [[Ministry of Commerce and Industry (India)|Ministry of Commerce and Industry]] and has five main administrative sections:<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/about-us.htm|title=Organisation structure|website=Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks}}</ref>
* [[Patent]] Office
* [[Design]]s Registry
* [[Trademark]]s Registry
* [[Geographical indication]]s Registry
* [https://ipindia.gov.in/rgniipm.htm Rajiv Gandhi National Institute of Intellectual Property Management] (NIIPM)
* Patent Information System
The patent office is headquartered at [[Kolkata]] with branches in [[Chennai]], [[New Delhi]] and [[Mumbai]], but the office of the CGPDTM is in Mumbai. The office of the Patent Information System and National Institute for Intellectual Property Management is at [[Nagpur]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/rgniipm.htm|title=RGNIIPM website}}</ref> The Controller General (CG), who supervises the administration of the Patents Act, the Designs Act, and the Trade Marks Act, also advises the Government on matters relating to these subjects. Shri. Unnat P. Pandit is the current CG and took charge in April 2022. Under the office of CGPDTM, a Geographical Indications Registry has been established in Chennai to administer the [[Geographical Indications]] of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.

The Indian Patent Office has 667 Group A Gazetted officers, out of which 526 Patent Examiners, 97 Assistant Controllers, 42 Deputy Controllers, 1 Joint Controller, and 1 Senior Joint Controller, all of whom operate from four branches.
Officer' Cadre of Indian Patent Office :

1. Controller General Of Patents & Design ( equivalent to Secretary to Government Of India/ Payband Level 15)

2. Senior Joint Controller Of Patents & Design ( equivalent to Additional Secretary to Government of India/ Payband Level 14)

3. Joint Controller Of Patents & Design ( equivalent to Senior Joint Secretary to Government of India/ Payband Level 13)

4. Deputy Controller of Patents & Design ( equivalent to Joint Secretary to Government Of India/ Payband Level 12)

5. Assistant Controller of Patents & Design (equivalent to Deputy Secretary to Government of India/ Payband Level 11)

6. Examiner Of Patents & Design ( equivalent to Under Secretary to Government of India/ Payband Level 10)

Although the designations of the Controllers differ, all of them (with the exception of the Controller General) have equal authority in administering the Patents Act. There are numerous other employees comes under Group B, C, D, works and operate from the four branches.
An Indian [[Patent Examiner]] is mandated to search for prior art and for objections under any other ground as provided in the Patent's Act, then to report to the Controller, who has the power to either accept or reject Examiners' reports. Unlike the system at the [[USPTO]] /EPO/JPO, Examiners at IPO have only recommending power and the controllers are empowered by statute either to accept or refuse their recommendations. Examiners' reports to the Controller are not open to the public unless courts allow it (section 144 of the Patents Act). A Parliamentary committee has recommended repealing S144.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://164.100.47.5/newcommittee/reports/EnglishCommittees/Committee%20on%20Commerce/88th%20Report.htm|title=Repealing S144}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Attrition-hit_offices_get_impatent/articleshow/2257791.cms|title=Attrition-hit offices get impatient- Jobs-News By Industry-News-The Economic Times|newspaper=The Economic Times |date=6 August 2007 |last1=Choudhary |first1=Sanjeev }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/2008/07/10011232/Patent-offices-suffer-as-priva.html|title= Patent offices suffer as private companies lure experienced staff}}</ref>

===Patent duration===
Term of every patent in India is 20 years from the date of filing of patent application, irrespective of whether it is filed with provisional or complete specification. However, in case of applications filed under PCT the term of 20 years begins from the International filing date accorded under PCT.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/Images/pdf/Final_FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS_-PATENT.pdf|title=Frequently Asked Questions}}</ref>

Since the rights granted by an Indian Patent Office extends only throughout the territory of the India and ceases to have effect in a foreign country, an inventor who wishes patent protection in another country must apply for a patent in a specific country (according to its law) either through :[[Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property|PCT route]] or through conventional filing of application.

=== Patent Renewal and Restoration of Lapsed Patent ===
In order to keep the patent rights for the entire period, India's Patent Act has made it mandatory for the patent holders to pay a renewal fee.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=https://www.india-briefing.com/news/patent-renewal-india-fee-procedure-17752.html/|title=Patent Renewal in India - Fee and Procedure|date=2018-09-27|website=India Briefing News|language=en|access-date=2020-04-12}}</ref> Once the patent is granted the patentee does not need to pay a renewal or maintenance fee for the first two years. The first renewal fee will be payable from the third year onwards.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/faq-detail.htm?52/What+are+obligations+of+the+patentee+after+the+grant+of+patent|title=FAQ Details|website=www.ipindia.nic.in|access-date=2020-04-12}}</ref> The patentee is also given a choice to pay the whole fees at a time or they can pay it every year.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/faq-detail.htm?53/Can+the+patentee+pay+renewal+fee+at+a+time+or+has+to+pay+every+year|title=FAQ Details|website=www.ipindia.nic.in|access-date=2020-04-12}}</ref> If in case the patent is not renewed by the company or individual, the patent ceases to exist and will be moved to the public domain.<ref name=":0" /> Once the subject matter that has been patented enters the public domain it is no longer protected and can be used by anyone without facing any suit or consequences of patent infringement.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|url=https://www.mondaq.com/india/patent/807506/restoration-of-lapsed-patents-in-india|title=Restoration of Lapsed Patents in India - Intellectual Property - India|website=www.mondaq.com|access-date=2020-04-12}}</ref>

Restoration of a lapsed patent is relatively time taking and a complex procedure.<ref name=":0" /> According to Section 60 of The Patents Act, 1970, an application for the restoration of the patent can be made by the patentee or their legal representative and the petition should be applied to the controller at the Indian Patent Office (IPO) within eighteen months from the date at which the patent ceases to have an effect.<ref name=":1" /> However, the application should contain a statement which states the reason behind the failure in paying the renewal fees and evidence which can be in the form of a letter, copy of documents or a deed.<ref name=":0" /> The applicant should also be ready to submit additional evidence regarding the same if asked by the controller. After examining all the information provided by the applicant, if the controller feels that the reason and the evidence provided by the applicant imply towards unintentional failure to pay the renewal fees then he/ she would publish the application and any person can oppose the restoration application within the prescribed period by filling form 14 and paying a fee.<ref name=":0" /> If in case the opposition gives a notice during the prescribed period then the controller would notify the applicant about the same and would give an opportunity to both the applicant and the controller to present their respective arguments before deciding the case. If no notice is given by the opposition or if the decision of the controller is in favor of the applicant if in case of the opposition, then upon payment of any unpaid additional and renewal fee the patent is restored.

===Geographical Indications===
{{Further|List of Geographical Indications in India}}
India, as a member of the [[World Trade Organization]] (WTO), enacted the [[Geographical Indications]] of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 has come into force with effect from 15 September 2003. GIs have been defined under Article 22(1) of the [[WTO]] [[Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights]] ([[TRIPS]]) Agreement as: "Indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a member, or a region or a locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographic origin."<ref name=kt>{{cite news|url=http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/k%60taka-gets-highest-numbergi-tags/319698/|title=Karnataka gets highest number of GI tags|date=11 April 2008|work=[[Business Standard]]}}</ref>

The GI tag ensures that none other than those registered as authorised users (or at least those residing inside the geographic territory) are allowed to use the popular product name. In 2004–05, [[Darjeeling tea]] became the first [[GI tag]]ged product in India and since then by July 2012, 178 had been added to the list.<ref name=kt/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-09-16/india/28109930_1_tirupati-laddu-laddu-prasadam-gi-status|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110408073852/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-09-16/india/28109930_1_tirupati-laddu-laddu-prasadam-gi-status|url-status=dead|archive-date=8 April 2011|work=[[The Times of India]]|title=Tirupati laddu gets global patent|date=16 September 2009}}</ref><ref name="hist">{{cite web|author=Govind D. Belgaumkar and Anil Kumar Sastry|url=http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/27/stories/2006102714680200.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070210153012/http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/27/stories/2006102714680200.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=10 February 2007|work=[[The Hindu]]|title=Unique symbols of Karnataka |date=27 October 2006}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/GI-tag-TN-trails-Karnataka-with-18-products/articleshow/6458268.cms|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121103144531/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-08-29/chennai/28312502_1_gi-tag-gi-registry-gi-protection|url-status=live|archive-date=3 November 2012|work=[[The Times of India]]|title=GI tag: TN trails Karnataka with 18 products|date=29 August 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/a-copyright-for-bikaneri-bhujia-hyderbadi-h/681218/|title=A copyright for Bikaneri bhujia, Hyderbadi haleem|date=14 September 2010|work=The Indian Express}}</ref>

===Modernisation===
The Indian Patent Office has implemented a modernisation program according to an Indian govt website. And according to this website "Efforts have been made to improve the working of the Patent Offices within the resources available and that the problem of backlog is also being attacked through 50% higher monthly target for disposal of patent applications per Examiner".<ref>{{cite web |title=Indian Patent Advanced Search System |url=https://iprsearch.ipindia.gov.in/publicsearch}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/images/pdf/report-tambhu-vadal-march-2007.pdf|title=Modernization of IP Offices in India}}</ref> E- Filing of Patents & Trademarks is made possible and according to an Indian Minister the first phase of the modernisation comes to an end and the Indian Patent office wishes to be an International search Authority.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ipindiaservices.gov.in/isaweb/agreement.pdf|title=Agreement between the Indian Patent Office and WIPO}}</ref> The second phase of modernisation has been proposed with the aim of achieving US patent examination efficiency among others.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dipp.nic.in/dipp_budget/outcomeBudget2007-08.pdf|title=Outcome Budget 2007–2008|publisher=Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, [[Government of India]]|access-date=22 January 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090219040757/http://dipp.nic.in/dipp_budget/outcomeBudget2007-08.pdf|archive-date=19 February 2009|url-status=dead}}</ref> Patent filings during the year 2007–08 were 35218.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/IPOAnnualReport/1_85_1_1_38_1_annual-report-07-08.pdf|title=Annual Report 2007-2008|publisher=IPIndia}}</ref>

== Criticism ==
As per an Indian patent attorney, patents which were beyond the Act were granted by the office.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.managingip.com/?Page=17&ISS=17631&SID=524406|title= Managing Intellectual Property}}</ref> The Indian Patent office had an unusually high grant rate for the year 2005–06 in respect of numbers of refused patent applications compared to other major patent offices.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipindia.nic.in/annual-reports-ipo.htm|title=Patent Office Annual Reports}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/pct_a_36/pct_a_36_10.pdf|title=Appointment of the Indian patent office as an international searching and preliminary examining authority}}</ref> The monthly target for Indian examiners is 30 new and amended applications per month and the Indian Patent Office strictly has only 12 months to grant/refuse the application as compared to foreign patent offices where applicants can extend the final date indefinitely. Knowledge commission, an Indian Government appointed body has recommended measures regarding the functioning of the office.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://knowledgecommission.gov.in/downloads/recommendations/IPRPM.pdf|title=Knowledge Commission recommendations- IPR.doc|access-date=8 January 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071031132344/http://knowledgecommission.gov.in/downloads/recommendations/IPRPM.pdf|archive-date=31 October 2007|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/Articles/2007/09/26001101/Lawyer-group-to-challenge-pate.html|title= Lawyer group to challenge patent for Roche?s anti-HIV drug – livemint}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/2007/12/21225939/Controller-orders-inquiry-into.html|title= Controller orders inquiry into Chennai office patent for Roche – livemint}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://dipp.gov.in/sites/default/files/DiscussionPaper_CGPDTM_05October2011%20%207.pdf|title=Restructuring CGPDTM|access-date=4 March 2019|archive-date=6 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306043944/https://dipp.gov.in/sites/default/files/DiscussionPaper_CGPDTM_05October2011%20%207.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>

There is a growing space of research literature about the Indian Patent regime, for example, in the context of how the working of pharmaceutical patents remains low in India, and how the Form 27 amendment does not sync with the reality of how it brings quality to Indian patents.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://www.elgaronline.com/view/journals/qmjip/14/4/article-p374.xml |first1=Tania |last1=Sebastian |first2=Nancy |last2=Sebastian |title= Local Working of Pharmaceutical patents in India: an empirical exploration into its determinants |journal=[[Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property]] |volume=14 |issue=4 |year=2024 |pages=374–404 |doi=10.4337/qmjip.2024.04.02 |access-date=18 December 2024|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

The controversial promotion of examiners as assistant controllers has led to an imbalance in the set-up with more controllers than examiners.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://spicyipindia.blogspot.com/2009/01/indian-patent-office-breaks-with.html|title=Indian Patent Office Breaks with Tradition and Gets a New Chief|date=12 June 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/cnbc-tv18-comments/indian-patents-hit-due-to-ongoing-battle_502588.html|title=Indians patents hit due to legal battle}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.me.titech.ac.jp/~ytanaka/english/memberse/MOHANTY.pdf|title=The Advantages and Harmonization of Patent System, See page 52|access-date=2 May 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110722075716/http://www.me.titech.ac.jp/~ytanaka/english/memberse/MOHANTY.pdf|archive-date=22 July 2011|url-status=dead}}</ref> Controller General had promised time-bound promotions to officers and recruitment of new examiners to mitigate the crisis of lack of officers and the problem of attrition due to low pay and lack of promotion.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.managingip.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=2282053|title=Meeting India IP challenges-Source-Managing Intellectual Property}}</ref> Cases of corruption have been reported.<ref name="dipp.nic.in">{{Cite web|url=http://dipp.nic.in/English/Discuss_paper/feedback29_CGPDTM_30November2011.pdf|title=DIPP|access-date=15 July 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151015164209/http://dipp.nic.in/English/Discuss_paper/feedback29_CGPDTM_30November2011.pdf|archive-date=15 October 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> In 2012, only 137 out of the announced 257 candidates expressed interest to join.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2012/02/demand-for-flexible-compensation-scheme.html|title=Demand for flexible compensation|date=12 June 2023 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://164.100.47.132/lssnew/psearch/QResult15.aspx?qref=123058|title=Parliament discussion on Patent Office|access-date=14 June 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307193246/http://164.100.47.132/lssnew/psearch/QResult15.aspx?qref=123058|archive-date=7 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> The monthly target for examiners are 15 new cases(FERs) and 25 disposals which has led to officers working under tremendous pressure to show output thereby affecting the quality of grant of patents.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/hgOCkYuyYrRelSuRAxz4iJ/To-clear-backlog-Indian-patent-office-to-hire-500-over-next.html|title= Livemint-To clear backlog, Indian patent office to hire 500 over five years|date= 26 July 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/fE7Irl1SPf6G2emorVC26H/Staff-shortage-dogs-patent-office-as-govt-sits-on-compensation.html|title= Staff shortage dogs patent office as govt sits on compensation plan-livemint|date= 24 October 2012}}</ref> Indian patent examiners have the higher workload and the pay is amongst the lowest.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.livemint.com/2008/07/10011232/Patent-offices-suffer-as-priva.html |title=Patent offices suffer as private companies lure experienced staff |last1=Unnikrishnan |first1=C.H. |last2=Narayan |first2=Khushboo |date=10 July 2008 |website=livemint.com |publisher=Livemint & The Wall Street Journal |access-date=1 March 2014}}</ref> While a patent examiner in the European Patent Office would handle less than seven patent applications per month and a USPTO examiner would handle eight applications per month, an Indian examiner reportedly handles at least 40 applications a month. However an Indian examiner's monthly salary is less than a third of his/her counterparts in other foreign patent offices.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/2010/09/13220649/IndianIPexaminershaveworld.html?atype=tp|title=Lowest pay for IP officers}}</ref> The issue of attrition due to lack of promotion to examiners was acknowledged by the Minister of Commerce and Industry [[Nirmala Sitharaman]] during IP day celebrations.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cii.in/PressreleasesDetail.aspx?enc=4Z53FYI91SP32Tn8ZB767FpVKtmPyNTe8Z4u0gDxCcY=|title= Intellectual Property should go for Commercialisation: Nirmala Sitharaman}}</ref> A concerned government official recommended outsourcing of search in view of increased work load and the IPO has started to outsource prior-art searches violating the stipulations of the prevailing Patents Act.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.financialexpress.com/news/patent-office-outsources-authentication-searches-to-csir/749158/0|title= Patent office outsources}}</ref> However, because of quality and legal issues with outsourcing, the outsourcing contracts were cancelled. The Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion under the Ministry of commerce, Government of India has come out with a discussion paper in order to address the issues plaguing the Indian Patent Office such as granting financial and administrative autonomy, separation of Patent and Trademark offices, setting up of additional offices are some of the issues put forth for input from stakeholders.

=== Accessibility ===

The IP Office in India has faced criticism for its lack of accessibility for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs). Historically, its systems did not comply with GIGW 3.0 guidelines<ref>{{cite web |url=https://guidelines.india.gov.in/introduction/ |title=GIGW 3.0 guidelines |access-date=18 November 2024 |archive-date=22 December 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241222162736/https://guidelines.india.gov.in/introduction/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> and the BIS Standard (IS 17802).<ref>{{cite web |url=https://standardsbis.bsbedge.com/BIS_SearchStandard.aspx?keyword=Accessibility%20for%20the%20ICT%20Products%20and%20Services&id=0 |title=BIS Standard (IS 17802) |access-date=18 November 2024}}</ref> PwDs, especially those using screen readers, faced significant challenges in accessing online systems.

On 29 November 2021, Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala, a Patent & Trademark Attorney with blindness, filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court (W.P. No. 21978/2021) demanding that the Office of Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trademarks (O/o CGPDTM) make its systems and websites accessible for PwDs. The petition highlighted the office's non-compliance with accessibility guidelines and requested accommodations such as OCR-readable documents and screen-reader compatibility.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/case_status.php |title=W.P. No. 21978/2021 Case Status |access-date=18 November 2024}}</ref>

In response to the petition, the O/o CGPDTM issued the *Guidelines for Accessibility and Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities* on 4 March 2022.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://ipindia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/News/791_1_Guidelines_for_Accessibility_and_Reasonable_Accommodations_for_Persons_with_Disabilities.pdf |title=Guidelines for Accessibility and Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities |date=4 March 2022 |access-date=18 November 2024}}</ref> These guidelines included the following measures:
* Providing OCR-readable documents upon request by PwDs.
* Integration of audio captchas on websites.
* Conducting virtual hearings using Webex, a platform compatible with screen readers.
* Favorable consideration of adjournment requests made by PwDs due to accessibility issues.
* Initiating a project to make websites compliant with accessibility standards, subject to approvals.

On 17 September 2024, the Karnataka High Court disposed of the writ petition after noting that the petitioner’s concerns had been “substantially complied with.” The court acknowledged the measures taken by the office but highlighted that the full implementation of website accessibility would depend on the completion of ongoing projects and approval processes.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/crime/making-websites-friendly-for-disabled-patents-office-tells-high-court/articleshow/113608233.cms |title=Making websites friendly for disabled: Patents office tells High Court |date=18 November 2024 |access-date=18 November 2024}}</ref>
==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=15em}}
*[[Certification marks in India]]
*[[ISI mark]]
*[[BIS hallmark]]
*[[Agmark]]
*[[FPO mark]]
*[[Quality Council of India]]
*[[Bureau of Indian Standards]]
{{div col end}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* {{official website|http://www.ipindia.nic.in/}}
* [http://www.ipindia.nic.in/writereaddata/Portal/IPOAct/1_31_1_patent-act-1970-11march2015.pdf Indian Patent Act 1970]
* [http://www.ipindia.nic.in/about-us-gi.htm Geographical Indication Registry India, website]
* [https://www.epo.org/searching-for-patents/helpful-resources/asian/india.html Information about patent law in India] on the [[European Patent Office]] web site

{{Asia topic|Patent office in|title=[[Patent offices in Asia]]}}

[[Category:Science and technology in India]]
[[Category:Patent offices]]
[[Category:Executive branch of the government of India]]
[[Category:Indian intellectual property law]]
[[Category:International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authorities]]

Indian Patent Office - Revision history

RonAgnew292842 at 12:25, 25 March 2026