Legal opinion: The sleeping FSSAI giant awakes from its slumber as Maggi tumbles

Kunal Kishore talks food

As the Indian food safety regulator has just announced that it would finally draft new norms for maximum lead and other heavy-metal content in foods, Advocate Kunal Kishore explains why food regulation has been neglected for far too long.

The whole controversy surrounding Maggi has caught everyone’s attention on two issues. First, Nestle and second the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). People now realise that a government organisation exists that is supposed to ensure the safety of the food we consume. FSSAI has been in the news for quite some time now in relation to imported food items, but its name has now reached the common man with the Maggi controversy.

FSSAI was established under section 4 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act). It consists of a chairperson and 22 members. Members are appointed from various ministries related to food and also include representatives from the food industry, consumer organisations, food scientists/technologists, farmer’s organisations and retailer’s organisations. FSS Act also provides for the appointment of a Chief Executive Officer who is the legal representative of FSSAI, responsible for day-to-day administration and various other works. There is also a central advisory committee, scientific panels and a scientific committee.

The duty of FSSAI is to regulate and monitor the manufacture, processing, distribution, sale and import of food so as to ensure safe and wholesome food for public consumption. Under the FSS Act, FSSAI is, inter alia, empowered to make regulations prescribing standards for food items including limits on food additives, crop contaminants and pesticide residue. However, FSSAI can only come out with these regulations after receiving the approval of the Central Government and each house of parliament.

The mandate of the FSS Act is enforced by both FSSAI and state food safety authorities. State food safety authorities consist of food safety officers, designated officers and commissioners of food safety.

Food Product Standards and Food Additives Regulations

FSSAI came out with various regulations including the Food Safety and Standards (Food Product Standards and Food Additives) Regulations (the regulations). These regulations provide standards for different kinds of food articles and additives that are allowed to be used in food products. It also provides tables wherein different kinds of food items are mentioned, along with the additives that are allowed to be used.

This suggests that only those food items and additives that are specifically mentioned under the regulations are allowed. However, interestingly under the regulations an entry of “Proprietary Food” is defined to mean a food that has not been standardized under the regulation. Further, it provides that in addition to the labelling requirements provided under these regulations, a proprietary food shall also conform to the following:-

Conform to the labelling requirements specified under these regulations (it appears that the expression “these regulations” refers only to Food Product Standards and Food Additives Regulations” and it does not refer to labelling regulation) Name of the describing shall be as clearly as possible Nature or composition of the food shall be mentioned on the label The food shall comply with all other regulatory provisions specified in these regulations and appendices A and B (Appendix A provides tables wherein permissible usage of food additives are mentioned and Appendix B specifies micro-biological requirements) 

But why are only 377 food items standardised? Are 377 food items sufficient to cover all categories of food items? What happens to those food items that are not mentioned under Appendices A and B? How will the additives used therein be regulated? How are food items that existed at the time of the implementation of the regulations, and fall within the definition of “Proprietary Food”, regulated? How are food items that are standardised food but use extra additives treated?

To date most of the legal issues and disputes have arisen due to the term“Proprietary Food”. From the definition one cannot conclude that non-standardised foods are not allowed to be manufactured, imported or sold. However, at the same time it also cannot be concluded that all the non-standardised food items are allowed to be manufactured, imported or sold. Only 377 food items are standardised, with all remaining food items falling under the term “Proprietary Food”. Given this background, the following questions arise:-

There are many questions like these that leaves us to wonder how they can be allowed to crop up in the first place and where does the answer lie. These questions arose because, at the time of transition from the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PFA) to FSS Act, the regulations were imported without serious review.

So today what we have are old regulations which were adopted some 40 to 50 years ago. Different countries across the world have included at a minimum 5000 to 10,000 standards in their food safety laws, yet we are stuck with only 377. Now, if FSSAI wanted to correct this mistake they would have to go to parliament for their approval as per section 93. So instead they came out with a short-cut called product approval scheme (the scheme) .

Product approval scheme

The scheme was launched through an advisory process not through regulation which ideally should have been the case. Through the scheme, FSSAI have tried to achieve three objectives.

First, they improved their financial situation by fixing the fee for each product approval to Rs 25,000. As only 377 products were standardised, FSSAI was soon flooded with product approval applications and much needed money.

Second, they started collecting data on different kinds of foods through the applications. India had probably never had this information before and it didn’t cost them anything. In fact, they were getting money for it.

Third, they tried correcting their gravest mistake of not updating the standards at the time of transition from PFA to FSS Act.

The scheme also suited the industry as it allowed them to continue their business, which otherwise might have shut down or would have been highly susceptible to corruption. This arrangement suited both the regulator and the regulated until Vital Neutraceuticals decided this before the Bombay high court. Bombay high court held the scheme as ultra vires because the procedure laid out in section 92 and 93 was not followed, because it was not placed before the parliament and approval was not obtained.

In appeal, FSSAI approached the Supreme Court and the judgment of the Bombay high court was stayed and the matter is pending final hearing. So, to date, the product approval scheme is running and FSSAI does not allow anyone to manufacture, import or sell non-standardised food products without product approval.

It is because of this stand that Nestle was forced to withdraw Maggi Oats Masala Noodles with Tastemaker. But one very important thing went unnoticed, being the nature of the product approval scheme.

Analysing product approval systems existing in different countries, such a system generally exists only for novel food items or ingredients. Meaning from a particular date, FSSAI notifies the list of food articles, ingredients and additives that are known to have been used in food and are considered safe.

If a food business operator seeks to include any food item, ingredient or additive they will have to apply for product approval and pay a fee. The fee would be utilised to analyse the safety of the particular food item. However, our FSSAI did not bother to come out with any such updated list of known food items, ingredients and additives. Instead they asked everyone to apply for product approval, even for those food items, ingredients and additive that were already in use at the time of implementation of the regulations.

The purpose of doing this could have been to create a database at the cost of manufacturers, importers and sellers of food items. However, through this scheme, FSSAI is unduly enriching themselves at the cost of food business operators.

Under Appendix A of the regulations, the usage of additives has been specified by food category. In the same manner, FSSAI should update the list of accepted additives. However, they are not doing so and instead are asking every manufacturer and importer to obtain approval separately for the same additive used in similar products. The reasoning given is that the food product is said to be exclusive to the applicant and the food authority is restrained from sharing information.

Prima facie, it might look convincing but the logic is incorrect. The job of FSSAI is to specify whether a particular ingredient or additive is allowed to be used in a particular kind of food or not. And if yes then in what quantity.

Here, first, FSSAI is not specifying to food business operators what ingredients and additives are allowed. Rather they are taking advantage and must be earning money for approving the same ingredient or additive for possibly 10 or even 100 different food business operators.

Maggi Fiasco

Given this background, we will now look at the much discussed case of the present day, Nestle’s Maggi case. Here, we analyse some of the issues which went unnoticed:-

Effect of registration/licensing

Each packet of Maggi contained the FSSAI license number along with its logo. Does this not give an impression to the consumer that this food business operator is under the purview of the food safety authorities? Can consumers not assume that food safety authorities would have taken due inspection to ensure the quality?

During the whole Maggi episode, not even once did the FSSAI come out with a statement explaining how violations were allowed to take place at such a large scale. Forget about the explanation, even a future course of action has not yet been announced. This may mean that FSSAI is going to cancel Nestle’s license or it may mean that after a few months everyone will forget about it and Nestle will carry out its business as usual or with some improvement.

Non-identification of the source

Nestle never came out with a list of particular units where violations took place. Such a declaration would have helped them in restricting food recall to the Maggi manufactured in only such units and saved them to a great extent. At the same time, in the absence of any such declaration, inference can be drawn against them that violations took place at all units.

Food recall procedure

In the past weeks, print and electronic media has been flooded with news of the recall and it is being projected as one of the largest recalls ever. It may surprise readers to know that FSSAI has not implemented any food recall procedure to date.

The draft regulations in this regard were circulated for public discussion only 2-3 days prior to this Maggi fiasco. In the absence of these regulations how will FSSAI ensure the proper recall of the sub-standard Maggi packets? They might have to rely solely upon the declaration made by Nestle, which has already been widely published. Let’s hope they do not rely solely on media reports, and instead try and verify the data themselves.

Labelling violations

One of the reasons for banning Maggi was because “No Added MSG” was mentioned on the packet label. As per the FSSAI, this is mis-leading and they have relied upon a document of the US Food and Drug Administration to support their argument.

We appreciate the hard work that the FSSAI officials have put in to make a case against Nestle. However, it would have been appreciated more, had the guidelines been issued by FSSAI in advance. On the one hand, FSSAI maintains a view that what is permitted under Codex Alimentarius and other countries cannot be ipso facto regarded allowed in India, and on the other hand they themselves rely on foreign literature to make a case against a food business operator working in India.

Conclusion

FSSAI has been lethargic and inefficient in the past and it can be for many reasons including financial constraints and untrained manpower. Now they have started to pick up, however, they first need to put their house in order and then can expect everyone to follow them.

In their overenthusiasm, they might harm the industry and may jeopardise the jobs of many. In the last 2 to 3 months, one can definitely see a change in the workings of FSSAI. Its website appears more active and seems to be giving more clarity to the industry and consumers.

Despite this, there is lot more to improve. We hope that FSSAI soon starts quoting their own advisories in their orders rather than relying upon that of another country. 

Kunal Kishore is an advocate and he can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.">kunal@jlfs.in

Now, Food Served by Railways too Chugs Into Wrong Track

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: After the Maggi Noodle fiasco, it has come to light that even the food supplied by the Railways contains harmful and poisonous substances.

Giving credence to the fact, the sample reports from the Government Analyst’s Laboratory, here, reveal that around 30 food samples collected from various trains running across Kerala contain harmful and carcinogenic elements. But this is just a tip of the iceberg. The samples were collected in a period of three years - 2012-’14.

The numbers will be even higher, said sources in the Railways on condition of anonymity.

Last month, a woman and two children on Kerala Express were hospitalised at Palakkad due to food poisoning after they consumed a paneer dish.

The report which is with the ‘Express’ says the food samples contained harmful elements such as added synthetic colours - sudan dye 1 and 1V, (Sunset yellow FCF colour index 15985), (Carmoisine with colour index 14720), (Tartrazine with 19140), Brilliant Blue FCF - colour index 42090, Metanil yellow which were prohibited under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006).

Some products did not have company labels while some do not conform to the food safety standards (Packaging and Labelling 2011) and is therefore misbranded. These harmful ingredients were found in chilli powder, turmeric, chilli and tomato sauce, curd and bottled water.

Though, the defaulters were penalised, they get away easily, Railways sources pointed out.

“A meagre amount of Rs 2,500- Rs 3,000 is charged by way of fine. Because the catering agencies take contract for crores of rupees from the Railways,” they said.

Besides, the defaulters also make advantage of the loophole existing in the system, they clarified.

“The health inspectors who collect samples are not vested with more powers. They could levy a fine of Rs 2,500 to Rs 3,000. On the contrary, the food safety officers who can take the matter to prosecuting the defaulters are less in number. Shockingly, for Thiruvananthapuram and Palakkad divisions, there are only one food safety officer. Less number of food inspectors will lead to poor implementation,” the Railways sources said.

Things were well and good when the Railways was directly in charge of it.

“But everything went topsy-turvy once it started assigning the job to outside agencies. Most of the caterers are big north Indian companies,” said sources.

KFC says claims of germs in food untrue, "malicious intent" to damage brand

The NGO, Balala Hakula Sangham, had claimed that the samples picked up from five KFC outlets in Hyderabad were unsafe on the basis of the findings of Telangana State Food Laboratory (SFL).

KFC logo

Fast food chain KFC on Friday challenged claims that its products are unsafe for consumption due to the presence of harmful bacteria inside its food articles.

Reacting to claims of a Hyderabad-based NGO which alleged that the company's products contained harmful pathogens-- salmonella and E.Coli bacteria--KFC said that it was a case of "malicious intent" on the part of some individuals.

"We believe that this is a case of malicious intent on the part some individuals trying to damage our brand reputation," a KFC spokesperson said in a statement.

The NGO, Balala Hakula Sangham, had claimed that the samples picked up from five KFC outlets in Hyderabad were unsafe on the basis of the findings of Telangana State Food Laboratory (SFL).

"We have no knowledge of the sample being collected from any of our stores and have not received any intimation or notice from any authority in this regard," the spokesperson said adding that the company got to know of this report from the media only.

According to KFC, its products are freshly cooked and are perishable food items meant for immediate consumption.

"In any case, there is no possibility of any microbial development in our food which is freshly cooked at 170 degrees celsius," KFC said.

The statement further said the name of the supplier mentioned in the report by the NGO is not even in the poultry business and there is no KFC outlet in three out of the five locations shared by the organisation.

"We are not sure if this alleged sample was actually picked from a KFC store, what is the condition in which this was stored or transported," it added.

Food safety has come under the scanner in the country after Food Safety and Standards Authority of India directed Nestle to withdraw its instant noodles Maggi from the market.

Pathogens found in KFC food samples; food chain rejects report

The report, dated June 24, filed by SFL food analyst AV Krishna Kumari states: “I am of the opinion that the samples contains E.Coli and salmonella, which are pathogens and injurious to health. It is, therefore, unsafe.” The SFL is a part of the Hyderabad-based Institute of Preventive Medicine (IPM).

HYDERABAD: Five samples from five outlets of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) have been found to contain harmful pathogens, salmonella and E.Coli bacteria. The Telangana State Food Laboratory (SFL), which conducted the test on the bidding of NGO Balala Hakula Sangham, called the samples "unsafe" even as KFC rejected the findings and denied any knowledge of the samples being collected in the first place. 

The report, dated June 24, filed by SFL food analyst AV Krishna Kumari states: "I am of the opinion that the samples contains E.Coli and salmonella, which are pathogens and injurious to health. It is, therefore, unsafe." The SFL is a part of the Hyderabad-based Institute of Preventive Medicine (IPM). 

"We took the samples from Himayatnagar, Vidyanagar, Chikkadpally, Nacharam and ECIL X Road on June 18 and sent it to the state food laboratory the same day in packed and sealed condition in the original KFC snack box," said Anuradha Rao, president of the NGO. 

The US fast food giant in turn questioned the conditions under which the samples were transported for the test. In a written statement, it said: "This alleged report is a case of false allegation. We have no knowledge of the sample being collected from any of our stores and in what condition it has been transported for this alleged test. This is a perishable food item meant for immediate consumption." It added: "We have not received any intimation from any authority in this regard."

The NGO, at a press conference on Thursday morning, quoted from the report in which FSL food analyst AV Krishna Kumari specifically sought to clear doubts of any tampering by stating: "Sample received in sealed and labelled card box kept in brown colour paper." 

While the NGO sought an immediate ban on KFC products, K Balaji Raju, the designated food safety officer (DFSO) in charge of central zone of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) clarified that his department cannot take action if food samples are tested independently by an NGO. "Only when the food samples lifted by our department turns out to be positive in food safety lab for any contamination, it can result in an action against the defaulter from our side," he said. 

On its part, KFC claimed that it maintains the highest standards of hygiene. "There is no possibility of any microbial development in our food, which is freshly cooked at 170 degrees Celsius," the KFC spokesman said.

Food safety a big hazard for global brands

Put to the test: Maggi noodles being examined at the Assam State Public Health Laboratory

Bad water quality and erratic cold storage facilities make business a risky affair

At a McDonald’s plant outside Mumbai, 200 workers walk through air dryers and disinfectant pools, then get to work making the day’s 25,000 patties from chicken painstakingly sourced in a country with one of the world’s worst food safety records.

To safeguard its multibillion-dollar brand, McDonald’s says more than 100 checks it applies across its international operations are then carried out after that.

India’s tainted water, patchy cold storage network and a retail sector made up of tiny local grocers present a major risk for international food brands, whose reputation can suffer globally from one local slip.

This can mean educating hundreds of small, often illiterate, farmers — critical in a fragmented farming sector that in some cases still uses “night soil”, or human faeces, for composting.

“There are thousands of farmers you need to reach out to, each with maybe an acre, two acres of land,” said Vikram Ogale, who looks after the supply chain and quality assurance for McDonald’s India.

“Think of a situation where you have 1,000 farmers and ... you have to educate them, convince them.”

But even that is sometimes not enough.

Swiss food group Nestle is currently battling India’s biggest food scare in a decade and an unprecedented branding crisis in the country, after regulators reported some packets of its noodles contained excess lead, a finding the company disputes.

Its woes have laid bare the risks of operating in a country where it is difficult to build a watertight supply chain, and where state food safety infrastructure is minimal, at best.

Nestle, like other major brands conscious of the damage a food scare can create, says it carries out extensive testing and manages parts of its procurement processes electronically so ingredients, milk for example, are tagged and traceable.

It steam sterilises spices and transports edible oil in stainless steel tankers to avoid metal contamination.

It uses external audit firms to check suppliers.

Wal-Mart, which operates as a wholesaler in India, says its checks mean rejecting 10-11 per cent of produce daily.Trace elements

While all major international firms producing packaged food or fast food say they use trusted suppliers, most acknowledge their suppliers often rely on other providers, who then sub-contract to others and so on, making it a daily struggle to control the source of every last ingredient.

Nestle, for example, buys much of its spices from a supplier that itself sources spices from over 10,000 farmers. Spices such as turmeric and chilli powder have in the past been connected to lead poisoning, though there is no evidence that is the source of Nestle’s woes this time.

McDonald’s imported its French fries from the US until about seven years ago, while it sought out farmers and educated them on hygiene and best practice.

But not all ingredients can be easily imported, and the need to keep costs low inevitably pushes firms to source locally, forcing them to constantly educate and check standards of suppliers, and suppliers’ suppliers.

McDonald’s says it can trace all its ingredients, but for many, that is a challenge in a country where one in five food samples tested by the government is found to be contaminated, adulterated or mislabelled.

“International brands have standards, but what they can really control is from when they have access to the raw materials,” said Umesh Kamble, a supplier in Mumbai, who sells his products to restaurants in the country.

Nestle is now pushing ahead with India’s first ever national recall, pulling some 27,400 tonnes of its popular Maggi noodles off India’s shelves, a process that will take at least 40 days.

But India’s understaffed and under-resourced government infrastructure has left it in bureaucratic limbo.

It is still awaiting the full results of government tests and details on how they were carried out before it can fix any glitch or rebuild its brand. At Nestle’s plant in Moga, food analysts at its best-equipped lab in the country are unable to explain the discrepancy between internal tests and those run by the government that found high quantities of lead. “We are in the dark ... We are not privy to how they (the government tests) were done,” Satish Srinivasan, the 49-year-old head of Nestle’s Moga factory, told Reuters.

Karaikal officials crack down on artificial ripening of mango

M. Ravichandran, Food Safety Officer, inspecting the food items at a shop in Karaikal on Thursday as part of a drive to check food adulteration.

A large number of mango fruits ripened with carbide were seized and destroyed at various shops in and around Karaikal on Thursday.

A team of officials from the Food Safety Department conducted a raid at different restaurants, fruit stalls, provisional stores, snack bars, and seized refreshments, coloured jaggery and packed snacks which were found unsafe for health.

The seizure formed part of the arrangements made by the district administration for the smooth conduct of ‘Mangani festival’ scheduled to commence at Sri Kailsanathaswamy Temple here on June 29, said M. Ravichandran, Food Safety Officer, Puducherry, who conducted the raid.

As a large number of mangoes and huge volume of jaggery would be offered by the devotees, the authorities conducted the search at a number of fruit stalls and provisional stores. “Baskets of mangoes found ripened with carbide and the extra colour used to polish the jaggery were seized and destroyed,” he said.

He said that strict action would be taken against those found adulterating the jaggery with extra colours. Apart from imposing fine, criminal proceedings would be initiated against them, he added.

No free packets

No free food packet should be distributed at Tirunallar during festival days without prior permission. He has advised the donors to obtain permission from the authorities.

E. Vallavan, District Collector said steps had been taken to ensure quality fruits during Mangani festival.

DINAMALAR NEWS

Dதடையை மீறி விற்பனை புகையிலை பொருட்கள் பறிமுதல்

விழுப் பு ரம், ஜூன் 26:

தமி ழக அர சின் உத் த ரவை மீறி விழுப் பு ரம் கடை களில் விற் பனை செய் யப் பட்ட புகை யிலை பொருட் களை காவல் து றை யி னர் பறி மு தல் செய் த னர்.

புகை யிலை பொருட் களுக்கு தடை விதித்து தமி ழக அரசு ஏற் க னவே உத் த ர விட்டுள் ளது.

தடை உத் த ரவை மீறி பல் வேறு இடங் களில் புகை யிலை பொருட் கள் விற் பனை ஜரூ ராக நடந்து வரு கி றது. இதனை மாவட்ட உண வு பா து காப்பு அதி கா ரி கள் மற் றும் போதைப் பொ ருள் ஒழிப் பு பி ரிவு காவல் து றை யி னர் முறை யாக சோதனை நடத்தி பறி மு தல் செய்ய வேண் டும்.

ஆனால் அதி கா ரி கள் பெய ர ள வில் சோதனை நடத் து வ தால் விற் ப னையை முழு மை யாக தடை செய்ய முடி ய வில்லை.

விழுப் பு ரத் தில் நேரு ஜி வீதி, பாகர்ஷா வீதி உள் ளிட்ட பகு தி யில் செயல் பட்டு வரும் சில கடை களில் புகை யிலை பொருட் கள் விற் பனை நடந் து வ ரு கி றது.

இது குறித்து உண வு பா து காப் புத் துறை உரிய நட வ டிக்கை எடுக் கா த தைத் தொ டர்ந்து நேற்று காலை சிறப்பு தனிப் படை இன்ஸ் பெக் டர் ஜெரால்டு தலை மை யி லான போலீ சார் கடை களில் அதி ரடி சோதனை நடத்தி ஆயி ரக் க ணக் கான புகை யிலை பண் டல் களை பறி மு தல் செய் த னர். மேலும் கடை உரி மை யா ளர் களுக் கும் எச் ச ரிக்கை விடுத் த னர்.

விழுப் பு ரத் தில் தடை செய் யப் பட்ட புகை யிலை பொருட் களை, போதை பொருள் தடுப்பு பிரிவு போலீ சார் இரு சக் கர வாக னத் து டன் பறி மு தல் செய் த னர்.

DINAMALAR NEWS

வாடிக்கையாளர் கடும் அதிர்ச்சி உணவுப் பொருட்களில் தொடரும் அபாயம் பார்லே பிஸ்கட்டில் இரும்பு துகள்கள்

சேலம், ஜூன் 26:

நெஸ்லே நிறு வ னத் தின் மேகி நூ டுல்ஸ் தயா ரிப் பு களுக்கு தடை விதிக் கப் பட்ட தன் எதி ரொ லி யாக பால், பாக் கெட் குடி நீர், பிஸ் கட், டீத் தூள், பஜ் ஜி மாவு, மசாலா ெபாருட் கள், பருப்பு, ஜவ் வ ரிசி, வெல் லம், குளிர் பா னங் கள், எண் ணெய் போன்ற பல் வேறு பொருட் களின் மாதி ரி களை சேக ரித்து உணவு பாது காப்பு துறை அதி கா ரி கள் ஆய் வுக்கு அனுப்பி உள் ள னர்.

இந் நி லை யில் பார்லே நிறு வ னத் தின் தயா ரிப் பான குழந் தை கள் விரும்பி சாப் பி டும் ‘ஹைடு அண்டு சீக்’ பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட்டுக் குள் இரும் புத் து கள் கள் இருந் தது வாடிக் கை யா ளர் மத் தி யில் அதிர்ச் சியை ஏற் ப டுத்தி உள் ளது.

சேலம் கருங் கல் பட்டியை சேர்ந் த வர் சிவ சண் மு கம் (35). தனி யார் நிறு வன ஊழி யர். மார் கெட் பகு தி யில் உள்ள ஒரு பேக் க ரி யில் இருந்து 5 பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட்டு களை உற வி னர் கள் வாங்கி வந் துள் ள னர். இதில் பார்லே நிறு வ னத் தின் ‘ஹைடு அண்டு சீக்’ பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட்டும் ஒன்று.

ேநற்று காலை அந்த பிஸ் கட் பாக்ெ கட்டை தனது 3வயது குழந் தைக்கு கொடுப் ப தற் காக சிவ சண் மு கம் பிரித் துள் ளார். அதில் இருந்த பிஸ் கட்டு களில் இரும் புத் து கள் கள் ஓட்டி யி ருப் பதை கண்டு அதிர்ச் சி ய டைந் தார்.

இதை ய டுத்து உற வி னர் கூறிய சம் மந் தப் பட்ட கடைக்கு சென்று விளக் கம் ேகட்டுள் ளார். கடை ஊழி யர் கள் இங்கு வாங் கி ய தற் கான பில் ஏதா வது உள் ள தா?, வாங் கி ய வரை வரச் சொல் லுங் கள் என் றெல் லாம் கேட்ட தால் விரக் தி ய டைந்த சிவ சண் மு கம், இது குறித்து உணவு பாது காப் புத் துறை அதி கா ரி களி டம் புகார் ெதரி விக்க முடிவு ெசய் துள் ளார்.

இது கு றித்து சிவ சண் மும் கூறி ய தா வது: பார்லே நிறு வ னத் தின் ‘ஹைடு அண்டு சீக்’ பிஸ் கெட் சாக் லெட் வாசம் வீசும். விலை ரூ.25. இதில் 20 பிஸ் கட்டு கள் இருக் கும். இந்த பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட் குழந் தை களுக்கு மிக வும் பிடிப் ப தால் தொடர்ச் சி யாக அதை வாங் கிக் கொடுத்து வரு கி றோம். கடந்த ஞாயிற் றுக் கி ழமை சென் னை யில் இருந்து சேலம் வந்த உற வி னர் கள், கருங் கல் பட்டி காய் மார்க் கெட் பகு தி யில் உள்ள பேக் க ரி யில் இந்த பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட்டை (பிகேசி 18-5-15 பேட்ஜ், 138ஏ3) வாங் கி யுள் ளார். இந்த பிஸ் கட் பாக் கெட்டுக் குள் எப் படி இரும்பு துகள் கள் வந் தது என்று தெரி ய வில்லை. பொது ந லன் கருதி இது குறித்து உணவு பாது காப்பு துறை அதி கா ரி களி டம் புகார் செய்ய உள் ளேன் என்றார்.

DINAMALAR NEWS

DINAMALAR NEWS

குளுக்கோஸ் பவுடரில் வண்டு

சிதம் ப ரம், ஜூன் 26:

கட லூர் மாவட்டம் சிதம் ப ரம் பச் சை யப் பன் பள்ளி தெருவை சேர்ந் த வர் ரமேஷ். இவர் கடந்த இரு தினங் களுக்கு முன்பு சிதம் ப ரம் காசுக் கடை தெரு வில் உள்ள பெரிய மளிகை கடை ஒன் றில் ஆரஞ்ச் சுவை யு டைய குளுக் கோஸ் பாக் கெட் ஒன்று ரூ26 கொடுத்து வாங் கி யுள் ளார். அதில் 2015ம் ஆண்டு பிப் ர வரி மாதம் தயா ரிக் கப் பட்ட தாக உள் ளது. நேற்று காலை அந்த குளுக் கோஸ் பவு டரை தண் ணீ ரில் கலந்து தனது மகளுக்கு கொடுத் துள் ளார். குடிக் கும் போது தொண் டை யில் ஏதோ சிக் கி யுள் ள தால் வாந்தி எடுத் துள் ளார். குளுக் கோஸ் தண் ணீரை பார்த்த போது அதில் வண்டு கிடந் துள் ளது. சந் தே கப் பட்டு குளுக் கோஸ் பாக் கெட்டை கொட்டிய போது மேலும் சில வண் டு கள் வெளியே வந் துள் ளது. உட ன டி யாக அவர், வாங் கிய கடை யில் கொடுத்து விட்ட னர்.

தக வல் அறிந்த சிதம் ப ரம் நக ராட்சி உணவு பாது காப்பு அலு வ லர் பத் ம நா பன், சம் பந் தப் பட்ட கடைக்கு சென்று குளுக் கோஸ் பவு டரை கைப் பற்றி அதனை கிண்டி ஆய் வ கத் துக்கு அனுப் பி னார். இந்த சம் ப வம் சிதம் ப ரத் தில் பர ப ரப்பை ஏற் ப டுத்தி உள் ளது.