NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court on Tuesday rejected objections by the food and beverages industry and refused to modify its earlier order constituting a panel to frame guidelines on sale of junk food in school canteens.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Pradeep Nandrajog highlighted that their September 4 order "brings out that the concern in the writ petition is not with hazardous food or with a standard of food safety envisaged by the Act" and refused to scrap the committee.
It pointed out the concern is with a dietary habit and promotion of what is popularly known as junk food among schoolchildren and thus it would be wrong on the part of the representatives of food and beverages industry to state that the "committee constituted under Section 11, i.e. the Central Advisory Committee, cannot be directed to render an opinion. Any committee could have been directed by us to render an opinion".
The representatives had sought review of the order on the ground that the high court had carved out a new term "junk food" as the Food Safety Act doesn't make any differentiation on this ground. However, HC brushed aside the objections, saying the PIL raises the issue of sale of what is popularly known as junk food in the canteens of the schools, resulting in not only child obesity but also in other critical disorders and diseases.
The PIL, filed by Uday Foundation, also highlighted that various states in USA have already banned junk food sale in schools until at least after lunch. Similarly it cites a decision in England where fast food takeaway joints near schools have been declared unlawful.
The bench also argued that its order notes that the Act does not contemplate regulation of what may be called a 'junk food' since junk food is referred in the context of an eating habit i.e. consumption of junk food becoming a dietary habit.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Pradeep Nandrajog highlighted that their September 4 order "brings out that the concern in the writ petition is not with hazardous food or with a standard of food safety envisaged by the Act" and refused to scrap the committee.
It pointed out the concern is with a dietary habit and promotion of what is popularly known as junk food among schoolchildren and thus it would be wrong on the part of the representatives of food and beverages industry to state that the "committee constituted under Section 11, i.e. the Central Advisory Committee, cannot be directed to render an opinion. Any committee could have been directed by us to render an opinion".
The representatives had sought review of the order on the ground that the high court had carved out a new term "junk food" as the Food Safety Act doesn't make any differentiation on this ground. However, HC brushed aside the objections, saying the PIL raises the issue of sale of what is popularly known as junk food in the canteens of the schools, resulting in not only child obesity but also in other critical disorders and diseases.
The PIL, filed by Uday Foundation, also highlighted that various states in USA have already banned junk food sale in schools until at least after lunch. Similarly it cites a decision in England where fast food takeaway joints near schools have been declared unlawful.
The bench also argued that its order notes that the Act does not contemplate regulation of what may be called a 'junk food' since junk food is referred in the context of an eating habit i.e. consumption of junk food becoming a dietary habit.
No comments:
Post a Comment