Section 73 of the Patents Act, 1970
Controller and other officers
Establishes the office of the Controller and allows the Government to appoint examiners and officers who work under the Controller's direction.
Official legal text
The verbatim statutory text of this provision is reproduced from the official source and checked by our legal reviewer before it is published here. Until that check is complete for this page, read the exact wording directly from the official source linked below — it is the only version that governs.
This is a simplified explanation. Where it differs from the official text of the provision, or from an applicable Gazette notification, the official text and the notification prevail.
What this section says, in plain language
Every decision in the patent system - accepting an amendment, refusing an application, granting a compulsory licence - is legally the Controller's decision. Section 73 creates that office. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks appointed under the trade marks law is the Controller of Patents for the purposes of this Act, so one officer heads the whole industrial property administration.
The Government may also appoint as many examiners and other officers, with such designations, as it thinks fit. These officers discharge their functions under the superintendence and direction of the Controller. Examiners are technically qualified people, usually engineers and scientists, who search prior art and draw up the examination report; other officers handle hearings, oppositions and administration.
The Controller cannot personally sign every order in a system handling tens of thousands of applications, so the Act allows the functions of the Controller to be discharged by an authorised officer, subject to the Government's approval and to any conditions and directions imposed. That is why the order you receive is signed by an Assistant Controller or a Deputy Controller and still counts, in law, as the Controller's order. It is also why an appeal under section 117A lies against that order in the ordinary way.
Two practical points follow. First, the examiner's report is a recommendation to the Controller; the decision on whether the objections are met is taken by the Controller under section 14. Second, because all officers work under the Controller's direction, consistency is an administrative matter and not something an applicant can insist on as a right; if an order is wrong, the remedy is a hearing, a review or an appeal, not a complaint that another officer decided a similar case differently.
Why this section matters
Every applicant, opponent, patentee and agent who deals with the Patent Office, and anyone reading an order to work out who passed it and how to challenge it.
Throughout prosecution, from the first examination report to the final order.
The statutory office of the Controller, the power to appoint examiners and officers, and the authority for those officers to act for the Controller.
Applicants misread who decided their case, address objections to the wrong person, or waste time arguing that an officer had no power to pass the order.
How it works in practice
Whose decision is the refusal?
Bharadwaj Polymers Pvt Ltd, Vadodara, files an application for a biodegradable packing film. An examiner at the Chennai branch issues the first examination report, raising objections on inventive step and on the sufficiency of the working examples. Bharadwaj replies and attends a hearing before an Assistant Controller, who is not the examiner. The Assistant Controller is unconvinced on inventive step and refuses the application. Bharadwaj's director complains that the examiner should have decided the case, and that the Controller General never saw the file. Its patent agent explains that examiners report and do not decide, that officers exercise the Controller's functions when authorised to do so, and that the refusal is therefore an order of the Controller. The correct response is not a complaint about who signed it but an appeal to the High Court under section 117A within the period allowed, supported by fresh argument on why the cited documents do not make the film obvious.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks is the Controller of Patents under this Act.
- The Central Government appoints examiners and other officers as needed.
- Those officers work under the superintendence and direction of the Controller.
- Authorised officers can discharge the Controller's functions, and their orders are the Controller's orders.
- The examiner reports; the Controller decides whether objections are met.
- An order signed by a Deputy or Assistant Controller is appealable in the normal way.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Thinking an order is invalid because the Controller General did not personally sign it. Authorised officers act for the Controller.
- Treating the examination report as a final decision. It is a report; the decision comes after you have had a chance to reply and be heard.
- Expecting the Controller to overrule an officer informally on request. The routes are review, appeal or a fresh hearing, not correspondence.
Connected provisions
Indian patent law works in two layers. The Act carries the substance and the Rules carry the machinery. Because the layers are amended by different processes and at different times, they are presented in separate blocks instead of being merged into one description.
Forms, deadlines and fees
Fees are prescribed in the First Schedule to the Patents Rules. Because the Schedule is revised from time to time, and charges different amounts to different categories of applicant and for physical as against electronic filing, this page describes the fee without stating a figure. How Indian patent fees work.
Related judgments
Case law is added slowly and deliberately. A summary is drafted, checked against the reported judgment and then reviewed before publication, because a wrong case note can mislead a reader badly. No summary for this provision has reached publication yet. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 73
Is the Controller a judge?
Not in the ordinary sense, but when deciding contested matters the Controller acts in a quasi-judicial capacity. Section 77 gives the Controller several powers of a civil court, such as summoning witnesses, requiring documents and receiving affidavit evidence, and section 80 requires a hearing before any discretion is exercised against a party. So the Controller must give reasons, follow fair procedure, and can be corrected on appeal if those standards are not met.
Can I ask for my case to be moved to a different officer?
Allocation of files is administrative and applicants have no right to choose their officer. In rare situations, such as a demonstrable conflict of interest, a request supported by reasons may be made to the Controller. Dissatisfaction with an officer's approach is not a ground; the remedy for a wrong order is to seek a review where available, or to appeal to the High Court under section 117A.
Who actually searches the prior art on my application?
An examiner with a technical background in the relevant field. The examiner searches Indian and foreign patent databases and other literature, considers the requirements of the Act including patentability, unity of invention, sufficiency and clarity, and prepares the report which becomes the first examination report issued to you. The examiner's report is internal to the office and the Act treats such reports as confidential.
Does the same Controller handle patents and trade marks?
The same officer heads both administrations as Controller General, but the day-to-day work is separate, done by different officers under different statutes, and the Patents Act governs only patent matters. Do not assume that practice or precedent from trade mark proceedings transfers across, because the statutory tests, timelines and forms are different. Even the appeal routes differ, so always check which statute an order was passed under before working out your next step.
Received an order from the Patent Office?
MYCrave Consultancy reads Controller orders, explains what they decide and maps your options for review, hearing or appeal.
You will be speaking with MYCrave Consultancy & Services, the firm that operates this platform. General questions are answered free; matter‑specific work is quoted before anything is done.