2016 (9) TMI 661 - HC - Customs

Import of Olive Oil from Turkey Compliance with the requirements of Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 minor violation of the requirements to be complied with can the relief granted to the petitioner on the ground that the consignment which they have imported largely satisfies the labelling requirements under the Regulation and they were ready to explain the minor discrepancies pointed out by the authorised officer? - Held that - though the violations pointed out are minor, there appears to be several violations which though are stated to be minor if considered cumulatively may have to be interpreted as not in conformity with the labelling requirement. However, this observation should not be mistaken to state that the product is not a quality product nor it is unfit for human consumption. Being conscious of the fact that Court is exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Court would not venture into disputed questions nor it would have expertise to find out as to whether what has been mentioned in Turkey language is in fact the name of the company or other details to verify the serial number, batch number etc. The ingredients which are contained in the product should be disclosed in the label as required under the Regulations - these issues being technical matters have to be considered by the competent authority under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Petitioner entitled to one time relaxation petitioner to move to Director (Imports), Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, FDA Bhavan, Kotle Road, New Delhi 110 002 for one tie relaxation opportunity of personal hearing to be granted to petitioner decision to be taken within four weeks from the date on which the representation given as shelf life of product to expire in 2017 petition disposed off decided in favor of petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 regarding labelling requirements for imported Olive Oil.

Analysis:
The petitioner imported Olive Oil from Turkey and faced issues with labelling requirements under the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011. The petitioner contested the order passed by the authorised officer, challenging discrepancies in labelling for various types of Olive Oil products.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the labelling issues pointed out by the respondent were minor and could be rectified. They presented evidence to show compliance with labelling requirements, including demonstrating the source/seller as the manufacturer and the use of English language on labels. Reference was made to a Delhi High Court decision supporting their position.

On the other hand, the respondent emphasized the importance of strict adherence to labelling requirements for edible products, citing specific regulations not met by the petitioner. They highlighted the need for full compliance before certifying the product and mentioned the correct authority for seeking relaxation of norms.

After hearing both parties, the court acknowledged the technical nature of the issues and refrained from delving into disputed matters beyond its expertise. It noted that while the violations may seem minor individually, collectively they could impact conformity with labelling requirements. The court emphasized that the competent authority under the Food Safety and Standards Act should address these technical aspects.

The court directed the petitioner to approach the Director (Imports), Food Safety and Standards Authority of India in New Delhi for one-time relaxation from labelling requirements. The Director was added as a party respondent to the petition, and the petitioner was instructed to file an application with detailed documentation for consideration within a specified timeframe.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner the opportunity to seek relaxation from labelling requirements from the designated authority. The court set a timeline for the decision to be made, considering the product's shelf life and the duration since the Bill of Entry was filed. No costs were awarded, and related petitions were closed.