J&K&L HC: Undenied Pleadings are Deemed Admitted by Implication under the CPC  ||  Kerala HC: Transfer Order Pending Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot be Disguised as Punishment  ||  Allahabad HC: GST, Incentives, 0r Festival Advances Cannot be Deducted From Employee’s Retiral Dues  ||  SC: Absconding Accused Cannot Claim Anticipatory Bail Solely Because a Co-Accused Was Acquitted  ||  Supreme Court: District Cricket Bodies Must Adopt Good Governance Voluntarily, Not Follow BCCI Rules  ||  Supreme Court: Post-Award Property Purchasers Cannot Resist Execution of an Arbitral Award  ||  SC: Telecom Spectrum is a Community Resource and its Ownership Cannot be Decided under the IBC  ||  SC: Police Failure to Invoke IPC Provisions Led to Contractor’s Acquittal in Cement Stockpiling Case  ||  SC: Bank’s Internal Classification of Debt as NPA Does Not Determine Limitation under the IBC  ||  Bombay HC: Clarifies Procedure for Executing Foreign Decrees    

The Association of the Traders and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. - (16 Sep 2015)

Constitutionality of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 upheld

MANU/MH/2431/2015

Food Adulteration

The Bombay High Court summarised its position on the constitutionality and vires of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 as thus: “…if preventing fraud on the consumers and those who are guilty of endangering human life by indulging and dealing with the unsafe food are required to be dealt with iron hands…the provisions intend to curb such social evil…challenge as raised by the petitioners on every count ought to fail” Associations comprised of retailers, hotels and restaurants had alleged that the Act was vague and ambiguous in its terminology; it gave States little authority to fill in the ‘grey areas’; and powers of food safety inspectors and officials to take drastic action without giving due opportunity to be heard was against the principles of natural justice. The Court noted pervasive public health and interest behind the formulation and functioning of the Act. Officials empowered to take action were bound by procedures of show cause notice and anyone receiving the same had recourse to legal mechanisms.

Relevant : Section 16 Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 Act Dhariwal Industries Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Others MANU/MH/1519/2012 Sakhawant Ali v. State of OrissaMANU/SC/0093/1954

Tags : FOOD SAFETY   CONSTITUTIONALITY   PUBLIC INTEREST  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved