Dismissing petitions in The Association of the Traders Carrying on the Food Business of Various Food Items & Anr v Union of India & Ors, Mumbai Mewa Masala Merchants’ Association & Anr v Union of India & Ors, and Indian Hotel & Restaurant Association & Anr v Union of India & Ors, Bombay High Court recently upheld the constitutional validity of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and the rules and regulations framed under it.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
The petitioners had argued that the provisions of the act were unclear and impractical and gave unrestricted and unguided powers to the relevant authorities. They contended that the penal sections provide for “huge penalties, prosecution and imprisonment without being heard and the provisions would operate on overall whims and fancies” of the officers appointed under the act and violate articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Indian constitution. The petitioners wanted the court to issue orders declaring that hotels and restaurants were not manufacturers under section 3(zd) of the act and requiring that they be represented in the central advisory committee of the Food Authority, among other things.
Observing that the legality of legislative provisions “cannot be assailed in abstract”, a two-judge bench of the court said the petitions were too general, without any foundation and anticipatory in nature. The court observed that the act was a consolidation of previous laws pertaining to food safety and standards and that it was welfare legislation aimed at preventing health hazards which would be caused by consuming adulterated food.
As such, the court held that the act was a mechanism to implement article 47 of the constitution, by which it is the duty of the state to raise nutrition levels and the standard of living, and to improve public health.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
