Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2014 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 1061 - HC - Indian LawsLaboratory at Ghaziabad be not shut down - respondents stated that the Food Research and Standardisation Laboratory at Ghaziabad is not being shut down. It is only the administration which has been transferred to the Department of Health Services. Also further that the laboratory at Ghaziabad would be further upgraded - Held that - it has been contended by the petitioner that there is a great disparity between the number of samples being sent to the four FRSL laboratories at Kolkata, Ghaziabad, Mysore and Pune on the one hand and private laboratories on the other hand. In this context, the respondents shall file an affidavit indicating which are the private laboratories which have been authorized to conduct testing of food samples under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and/ or Rules and / or Regulations made thereunder. The respondents shall also file the connected notifications in this respect, if any. Seeking quashing of guidelines dated 24.01.2013 - Held hat - what is prohibited under the said Act, Rules and Regulations, but which is permitted under CODEX Alimentarius, will still be regarded as prohibited in terms of the law applicable in India. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion as to whether Allura Red is permitted or prohibited under the said Act, Rules or Regulations. It shall be pointed out by respondents in the affidavit which he shall file. Seeking a writ of quo warranto - Held that - the petitioner has drawn our attention to Section 5 of the said Act and in particular to sub-sections (2) and (3) thereof, which give an indication with regard to the eligibility of the Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India. According to petitioner, the respondent No. 4, who is the Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India, does not have the requisite eligibility inasmuch as he does not have a broad range of relevant expertise and is not a person who has been associated with the subject, as indicated in sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 5. In this connection also, the respondents may file an additional affidavit setting out their stand with regard to the respondent No. 4 being eligible for the said position as Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India.
Issues:
1. Prayer for writ of quo warranto 2. Quashing of guidelines dated 24.01.2013 3. Status of Food Research and Standardisation Laboratory at Ghaziabad 4. Disparity in sample testing between FRSL laboratories and private laboratories 5. Authorization of private laboratories for food sample testing 6. Testing of imported food articles under the Food Safety and Standards Act 7. Use of additives like Allura Red under CODEX Alimentarius 8. Eligibility of Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India Analysis: 1. Prayer for writ of quo warranto: The petitioner clarified that certain prayers were not being pressed, and only specific prayers related to quo warranto, quashing of guidelines, and the Food Research and Standardisation Laboratory at Ghaziabad were pursued. The eligibility of the Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India was questioned based on the provisions of Section 5 of the Act. 2. Quashing of guidelines dated 24.01.2013: The petitioner argued that certain additives prohibited under the Act, Rules, and Regulations were permitted under CODEX Alimentarius, but clarified that such permissions would still be considered prohibited under Indian law. The court directed the respondents to provide clarity on the status of these additives and their legality under Indian regulations. 3. Status of Food Research and Standardisation Laboratory at Ghaziabad: The respondents confirmed that the laboratory at Ghaziabad was not being shut down but was being administratively transferred to the Department of Health Services. They also assured that the laboratory would be upgraded, addressing the concerns raised about its closure. 4. Disparity in sample testing between FRSL laboratories and private laboratories: The petitioner highlighted a significant difference in the number of samples sent to FRSL laboratories compared to private laboratories. The court directed the respondents to submit an affidavit listing authorized private laboratories for food sample testing under the Food Safety and Standards Act, along with related notifications. 5. Authorization of private laboratories for food sample testing: The court requested the respondents to identify private laboratories authorized to conduct food sample testing under the relevant regulations. This information was deemed necessary to address the concerns raised regarding disparities in testing practices. 6. Testing of imported food articles under the Food Safety and Standards Act: The respondents were instructed to specify the laboratories where samples of imported food articles could be tested under the Act, Rules, and Regulations. This directive aimed to ensure transparency and compliance in the testing procedures for imported food items. 7. Use of additives like Allura Red under CODEX Alimentarius: The court emphasized that substances prohibited under Indian regulations, even if permitted under international standards like CODEX Alimentarius, would remain prohibited in India. The respondents were required to clarify the status of additives like Allura Red under Indian law. 8. Eligibility of Chairperson of the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India: The petitioner questioned the eligibility of the Chairperson based on specific expertise and experience requirements outlined in Section 5 of the Act. The respondents were directed to provide their stance on the Chairperson's eligibility, addressing the concerns raised by the petitioner. In conclusion, the court addressed various issues related to food safety regulations, laboratory operations, and the eligibility of key personnel within the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, emphasizing the need for transparency, compliance with regulations, and clarity on testing procedures and additives used in food products.
|