A consumer's right to know the shelf-life of packaged food stuff got a shot in the arm, as Madras high court has held that the terms `best before date' for use and `expiry date' meant two distinct things, and hence manufacturers must clearly mention two different dates if they choose to print both details on their products.
Justice S Vaidyanathan, refusing to come to the aid of a private packaged food company which had imported goods showing the same date as `best before date' as well as `expiry date,' said: “Even after `best before' date, a product can be consumed, as safety would be still intact though it may not be as good as what it would have been if used within specified time limit. There is no confusion as regards `expiry date', which is clear-cut and once it passes, the product will lose its value and cannot be consumed.“
The court also imposed a cost of `30,000 on the company , and directed it to pay `15,000 each to Schizophrenia Research Foundation (India) in Anna Nagar, and Banyan Adaikalam in Mugappair West within a month.
Adistilleries company had imported active dry yeast as a food item in September 2014 for home consumption. Customs and Chennai seaport and airport authorities refused to lift samples for clearance saying it did not comply with food safety and standards. The product labelling was not as per norms, they said, adding that the material carried same date for both `best before date use' and `expiry date'.
The company rushed to the court to quash the October 15, 2014 rejection order saying there was no requirement to declare `use by date' or `expiry date', and that mentioning same date for both is not in violation of the regulation.
The authorities, however, cited the statutory guidelines governing wholesale packages containing `best before date' and `expiry date'. The company had committed a similar violation on an occasion, and it was allowed to continue the trade after it gave an undertaking that it would comply with norms in future consignments.
Finding nothing wrong with the rejection orders, Justice Vaidhyanathan said: “It is clear manufacturers shall not sell or distribute any packaged food products not marked and labelled in the manner as specified by regulations. The labels shall not contain any statement, claim, design, device, etc., which is false or misleading in any particular concerning the food product or quantity or nutritive value.“
The judge said the company had violated its own undertaking given on th earlier occasion, and said the present case deserved to be dismissed with `30,000 as costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment