Nestle India did not opt for re-test, instead burnt Maggi noodles: FDA

Maharashtra’s Food and Drugs Administration today argued in the Bombay High Court that Nestle India had burnt several tonnes of Maggi after the state’s ban order was imposed on this food snack, instead of going in for a re-test of the samples.

“If the company was so confident about safe features of its product, it should have come forward and requested us to go for a re-test of the samples or it could have offered other samples for a fresh examination,” FDA counsel Darius Khambata submitted before justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawala.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Nestle against FSSAI’s June 5 order banning nine variants of Maggi, and Maharashtra government’s order prohibiting their sale.

FDA selected at random 20 samples of Maggi noodles for the test and five of them tested positive for containing lead beyond permissible limit. This was enough for FDA to issue notice to stop production and sale of all the 9 variants of Maggi, Khambata said.

If the company suspected that the FDA reports were not correct then it could have made a grievance before the food regulator to send the samples to an accredited lab in Pune or Nagpur, instead of rushing to the high court to challenge the ban imposed on production and sale of the product, he argued.

“Instead, Nestle chose to send samples to labs in London, New York and Paris and placed 2700 test reports before us (FDA) to show that lead content was proper,” he said.

Justifying the ban, FDA counsel argued that after tests when FDA found lead content in Maggi to be beyond permissible limit, it issued an order banning the product.

Moreover, FDA had sent lab test reports to Nestle but the company has not included these in the petition, thereby suppressing this fact from the high court, he said.

Both FSSAI and FDA have claimed that they had issued notices to Nestle India keeping in mind the health hazards the product may have had due to the high lead content.

Nestle has argued that a particular batch may have contained lead beyond permissible limit but the blanket ban was “unfair and illegal”.

Maggi Ban: Did info on the web influence your decision, HC asks FSSAI

On June 5, the FSSAI ordered Nestle India to withdraw all nine variants of Maggi instant noodles from the market.

The Bombay High Court Tuesday asked the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) if it was influenced by information on the internet while ordering a ban on Maggi noodles. The food authority has cited examples of other countries while stating that Maggi had a poor reputation.

Appearing for the FSSAI, Mehmood Pracha Tuesday submitted several reports stating that he downloaded them from the internet. All the reports, according to him, were significant in establishing that the company’s image was not as celebrated as projected.

Looking at the reports, Justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawalla asked, “Was the food authority, while passing the impugned order, influenced by these reports or common knowledge?”

Pracha replied in the affirmative, and said the authority was concerned about food safety.

The state Food and Drug Authority started its arguments through senior counsel Darius Khambatta, after Pracha concluded.

Khambatta argued that in Nestle India’s petition there was not even a “whisper” of allegation it was levelling now about FSSAI relying on test reports that were not from accredited labs. “It only finds a mention in the rejoinder they have filed,” he argued.

Nestle India has claimed that it had tested the product at 2,700 laboratories in India and abroad and the tests indicated that the lead content was less than the permissible limit of 0.5 per cent.

Khambatta said the company should have followed the procedure laid down within the FSS Act before moving the HC. “You cannot brandish 2,700 reports without following the simple procedure within the Act,” he argued.

On June 5, the FSSAI ordered Nestle India to withdraw all nine variants of Maggi instant noodles from the market terming them “unsafe and hazardous” for human consumption. The company had earlier argued that the CEO of FSSAI, while passing the order, had acted in an “emergent, drastic and arbitrary” fashion.

Nestle also argued that the food regulator had not served any notice before passing the ban order. A similar order was later passed by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Authority.

Maharashtra FDA asks: why was Nestlé silent?

Watchdog says firm was issued five notices, told it could test Maggi noodles at referral lab, but it chose not to do so

FSSAI banned Maggi noodles on 5 June following reports from various states about high levels of lead and the presence of taste enhancer monosodium glutamate. Photo: Bloomberg

Nestlé was issued five notices by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and even told that it could get tests on Magginoodles done at a referral laboratory, but the company chose not to do so, a lawyer for the Maharashtra FDA argued.

Nestlé is challenging the ban on Maggi noodles in the state in the Bombay high court. The Maharashtra FDA, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and the watchdog’s CEO are respondents.

In its arguments earlier this month, Nestle India Ltd argued that the procedures for banning a product were not followed. The Indian arm of Swiss multinational Nestle SA had questioned the Indian food authorities’ methods of testing and had said that it had 2,700 reports of tests that it had done in laboratories around the world and in India, which found the product safe.

“It is one of the most significant silences in this matter that Nestlé, with all the vociferous data and its 2,700 reports from all over the world, has never exercised this right. It’s one of the most telling signs in this matter,” argued Darius Khambata, who appeared for the Maharashtra FDA.

Nestle India did not follow the law of the land and did not request the state and government food regulators to conduct the tests at an accredited food laboratory even though the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, has provisions for the company to do so, argued Khambata.

The Act allows companies to request for a test at an accredited laboratory if they are not satisfied with the food lab results provided by the food authority. And if there is a variance in these reports, then the opinion of a referral food laboratory can be taken, Khambata said.

The lawyer argued that the watchdog does not need to get food tested only at accredited food laboratories. Under the Act, the tests have to be done by a food analyst, who is an expert, and can be conducted in any food laboratory. It’s his expertise that is of importance for validating the tests, Khambata said.

FSSAI banned Maggi noodles on 5 June following reports from various states about high levels of lead and the presence of taste enhancer monosodium glutamate. The food regulator termed the noodles as “unsafe and hazardous” for human consumption. Following its own tests, which found a high content of lead, Maharashtra banned the sales of Maggi noodles in the state on 6 June.

Maharashtra says Nestle violated procedure

The Maharashtra government told the Bombay High Court on Tuesday that Nestle India did not follow the legal procedure after the company was issued notice to explain the high levels of lead detected in samples of its Maggi noodles.

“The petitioners [Nestle] did not follow the procedure under the Act [Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006]. Food authorities cannot drag their feet in a matter of public health. There is a detailed mechanism in this Act which can solve the issue. There is a difficulty of foreign direct investment versus public health. The rule of law is the surest guarantee for both,” Darius J. Khambatta, counsel for the government and the State Food and Drug Administration, said.

Instead of following the procedure, the food manufacturer questioned the authority of the regulators and the government and the testing methods, Mr. Khambatta said.

“How can you condemn all the labs in India saying none is credible or does not meet your standards?” he asked.

Nestle had told the court earlier that 2,700 labs around the world had showed that Maggi noodles did not contain excess lead.

The court asked the government if there had been any “emergency” in banning the brand and why all its variants had been banned when only two of them were tested.

The government said 20 samples of two variants had been tested in Maharashtra, out of which five tested positive for lead in excess of the permissible limit. The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, which is the central authority, tested 72 samples of three variants and found that 30 of them contained high levels of lead.

DINAMALAR NEWS

Packaged. But is it safe?

Unknown source:Unauthorised units allegedly sell water obtained from private tankers in the bubble-top 20-litre containers of popular brands.

hat started as a source of drinking water for commercial entities and the affluent sections in society a few years ago has become a mainstay in a large number of households in the city. With people becoming more concerned about health and more disposable income at their command, the denizens of the city had started graduating to use packaged drinking water.

Dealers involved in packaged water business say more than 10,000 litres of bottled water are sold in the city every day. 

Arun, a dealer, said the demand for 20-litre bubble-topped cans had increased over the years. “I used to sell around 100 cans a day a year ago. In May, this year I sold 500 cans a day, mostly to households. We charge Rs.60 per can and if a consumer uses more than 2 cans a week, we give them a discount,” he said.

Price varies

However, he said, the price of bottled water differed from place to place.

Asha, a resident of Maruthankuzhi, said though there was piped water connection, they depended on bottled water for drinking needs. “The water supplied by the Kerala Water Authority turned very muddy and then we shifted to bottled water. On an average, we buy four cans a month. Buying bottled drinking water has become part of my household budget for the past two years,” she said.

The growing demand for bottled water has led to establishment of manufacturing units, particularly at places such as Neyyattinkara, Udayankulangara, Palode, Navayikulam, Menamkulam, Veli, and Parassala.

Rough estimates provided by dealers reveal that on an average 2,000 to 3,000 cans are produced at these units a day. Data gathered from city Corporation and district panchayat say that licences were issued for around 10 bottling units. However, there are umpteen unauthorised units functioning at the fringe pockets of the city. This has raised questions about the quality of water being supplied.

“Several complaints related to quality of bottled water have been received in the past several months,” B. Shivakumar, Joint Commissioner, Food Safety, told The Hindu .

As per this, notices were served on manufacturers. In fact, a criminal case was registered against the owner of a manufacturing unit at Kilimanoor for selling substandard water.

“The biggest problem we face is the use of cans having stickers of noted brands by local manufacturers. We are trying to curb this practice,” he said. A dealer with a prominent brand agreed with this. He said unauthorised units often filled water obtained from private tankers and sold them in the bubble-top 20-litre containers of popular brands.

Bombay high court unplugs import of Australian wine

MUMBAI: In a victory that has left Australian wine major in high spirits, the Bombay high court on Tuesday removed a plug on imports that the food safety regulator had placed on Jacob's Creek wine. 

The Australia's largest wine brand had moved the HC against the import ban on a shipment which the food safety regulator FSSAI said contained Tartaric acid. 

On Tuesday, the Bombay high court bench of Justices V M Kanade and B P Colabawalla allowed the petition filed by Pernod Ricard India which imports the spirit and disposed of the matter. The company had challenged the lack of no objection certificate (NOC) from food safety standard authority of India (FSSAI) for a shipload of Jacob Creek wine bottles. Iqbal Chagla, counsel for Pernod, which also distributes some other leading international brands, said, "Tartaric acid is not a prohibited additive under the regulations." He said the shipment has been lying at the Mumbai docks since last October or November when the NOC was refused. He said for the last ten years, the wine has been imported without a hitch and added that tartaric acid is found even in fruit juices. 

Mehmood Pracha, counsel for FSSAI argued that samples of the shipment when tested, as part of legal safety requirement, were found to contain tartaric acid which is not permitted in proprietary food. "It is presumed that these are standardized and not permitted to mix tartaric acid as it can have dangerous effects which are unknown."