Regulatory Oversight in India’s Food Service Sector

Context:

The Uttar Pradesh government mandates that food establishments display the names of key personnel to ensure transparency. Meanwhile, a similar proposal in Himachal Pradesh was rejected by the state government. The Supreme Court has clarified that only authorities under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, are empowered to issue such directives, preventing police from overstepping their jurisdiction in enforcing these regulations.

Relevance:

GS II: Government Policies and Interventions

Dimensions of the Article:

1. Food Business Compliance Requirements in India
2. State-Level Authority and FSSA Provisions
3. Legal Controversies around Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Directives

Food Business Compliance Requirements in India

• Mandatory FSSAI Licensing:
  • All businesses involved in food processing, distribution, sale, or import in India must register with the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), which was established under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) to ensure food safety and standards compliance.
• Small-Scale Operators Registration:
  • According to the FSSAI Licensing and Registration Rules, 2011, small food vendors, petty food manufacturers, hawkers, and stallholders must register with FSSAI.
  • Upon approval, they receive a certificate and photo ID, which must be visibly displayed at their place of business, vehicle, or cart.
• License Requirement for Large-Scale Food Operators:
  • Larger food enterprises must obtain an FSSAI license, which must also be prominently displayed within their premises.
• Display of Business Information:
  • Both small and large food businesses are required to visibly display the owner’s identity and business location through their FSSAI license and photo ID, ensuring transparency.
• Penalties for Non-Compliance:
  • Operating a food business without the appropriate FSSAI license, as per Section 63 of the FSSA, may result in imprisonment for up to six months and a fine of up to ₹5 lakh.
• FSSA Compliance Enforcement:
  • Improvement Notices:
    • In cases where a Food Business Operator (FBO) does not comply with regulations, an Improvement Notice may be issued. This document includes:
      • Reasons for non-compliance.
      • Required corrective measures.
      • A deadline for compliance, typically 14 days.
  • Consequences of Ignoring Notices:
    • Failure to comply with the improvement notice could result in license suspension or cancellation.
  • Fines for General Non-Compliance:
    • For offenses where no specific penalty is mentioned, Section 58 allows for fines up to ₹2 lakh.
  • Repeat Violations:
    • FBOs found guilty of repeating offenses may face:
      • Doubling of penalties.
      • Daily fines of up to ₹1 lakh.
      • Potential cancellation of their license, as per Section 64.

State-Level Authority and FSSA Provisions

• State Governments’ Authority under the FSSA:
  • Section 94(1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA) empowers state governments to formulate rules, subject to the approval of both the Central Government and the Food Authority. This enables them to perform their designated roles under the Act.
• Specific Areas for Rule-Making:
  • Section 94(2)(a): Allows states to establish rules regarding the additional roles of the Commissioner of Food Safety as outlined in Section 30(2)(f), where the Commissioner can be tasked with further duties as determined by the state government, in coordination with the Food Authority.
  • Section 94(2)(c): States have the autonomy to create rules governing any other necessary regulations as deemed appropriate for food safety enforcement.
• Commissioner’s Role:
  • The Commissioner of Food Safety, a state-appointed official under Section 30, is responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of food safety laws, with responsibilities including conducting surveys, training programs, and approving legal actions for violations.
• Approval of State-Made Rules:
  • As stipulated by Section 94(3), rules formulated by state governments must be presented to the state legislature for approval at the earliest opportunity.

Legal Controversies around Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Directives

• Court Challenges:
  • Directives issued by police in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand were brought before the Supreme Court for allegedly compelling individuals to disclose their caste and religious identities. Petitioners claimed that these directives breached Article 15(1) of the Constitution, which bars discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
• Concerns Raised by Petitioners:
  • Petitioners argued that the directives risked creating an economic boycott of Muslim minorities and infringed upon their rights to practice any profession, violating Article 19(1)(g).
  • They also contended that the directives indirectly endorsed the banned practice of untouchability, contravening Article 17 of the Constitution.
• Government Defense:
  • The Uttar Pradesh government defended the directives, emphasizing their intent to enhance food safety and public health by installing CCTV cameras in food establishments and conducting a statewide verification campaign.
  • In light of numerous food adulteration incidents involving unsanitary materials, the government argued that the measures were necessary to safeguard public health.

-Source: Indian Express