The Kerala High Court on Tuesday set aside the order of the Food Safety Commissioner prohibiting the manufacture, storing, selling, and distribution of Nirapara brand of chilly, turmeric and coriander powders.
Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque passed the verdict while allowing a writ petition filed by KKR Food Products, Kalady, manufacturer of the Nirapara brand of spices.
The court observed that under Section 30(2)(a) of the Food Safety and Standard Act, the Commissioner of Food Safety had the power to prohibit manufacture, storage, distribution or sale of any article of food in the interest of public.
The pre-requisite of exercise of this power was the satisfaction that the food article was unsafe for human consumption. In the absence of any finding on the unsafe nature of food, this power could not be exercised.
The court added that there was no finding in the order that the banned foods were unsafe for human consumption.
The statutory provision under the FSS Act clearly delineated proportionate measures in the case of food which was found unsafe for human consumption and food of substandard quality which was fit for human consumption. In the absence of any finding that the banned products were unsafe for human consumption, prohibition now effected was unwarranted and was done in excess of the jurisdiction vested with the Commissioner of Food Safety. Besides, the petitioner was not heard in the matter. Therefore, the irresistible conclusion was that the order was unsustainable. The court also made it clear that the Comissioner was free to take samples of the petitioner’s products and if it was found that it did not meet the standard under the regulations, the Commissioner was free to take measures to put public on alert about the substandard products sold by the petitioner.
Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque passed the verdict while allowing a writ petition filed by KKR Food Products, Kalady, manufacturer of the Nirapara brand of spices.
The court observed that under Section 30(2)(a) of the Food Safety and Standard Act, the Commissioner of Food Safety had the power to prohibit manufacture, storage, distribution or sale of any article of food in the interest of public.
The pre-requisite of exercise of this power was the satisfaction that the food article was unsafe for human consumption. In the absence of any finding on the unsafe nature of food, this power could not be exercised.
The court added that there was no finding in the order that the banned foods were unsafe for human consumption.
The statutory provision under the FSS Act clearly delineated proportionate measures in the case of food which was found unsafe for human consumption and food of substandard quality which was fit for human consumption. In the absence of any finding that the banned products were unsafe for human consumption, prohibition now effected was unwarranted and was done in excess of the jurisdiction vested with the Commissioner of Food Safety. Besides, the petitioner was not heard in the matter. Therefore, the irresistible conclusion was that the order was unsustainable. The court also made it clear that the Comissioner was free to take samples of the petitioner’s products and if it was found that it did not meet the standard under the regulations, the Commissioner was free to take measures to put public on alert about the substandard products sold by the petitioner.
No comments:
Post a Comment