Read Time: 09 minutes
Court noted, "...FSSA warrants to lay down science-based standards for food and regulate their manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import to ensure availability of wholesome food for human consumption. In view of the aforesaid, tobacco cannot be termed as “food” within the meaning of the FSSA as no science-based standards can be laid down for tobacco to regulate its sale, distribution and storage in order to ensure safe and wholesome tobacco for human consumption".
A Bench of Justice Gaurang Kanth of the Delhi High Court, quashed and set aside the impugned notification of the Food Safety Commissioner prohibiting the manufacture, storage, distribution, or sale of Gutka, Pan Masala, flavored/scented tobacco, Kharra, and similar products in the interest of public health for one year throughout the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi.
Justice Gaurang Kanth observed that the impugned notification by Food Safety Commissioner exceeded its power and authority in contravention of the powers vested in him under the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
The single-judge stated that it is aware of the harmful effects and diseases caused by tobacco use, both smokeless and smoking and believes that tobacco, in any form, not just smokeless but also smoking, is harmful to public health, and thus condemns and discourages the use of any form of tobacco.
Court further stated that tobacco and nicotine are harmful to health; however, the present case involves legal issues that cannot be decided solely based on public opinion and sentiment but must be decided and settled based on a fair interpretation of the law in light of judicial precedents.
The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by companies engaged in the lawful manufacture, trade, distribution, and sale of scheduled tobacco products, particularly flavored and scented chewing tobacco for several decades, challenging notifications issued by the Delhi government’s Food Security Commissioner that prohibited the manufacture, storage, distribution, or sale of gutka, pan masala, flavored/scented tobacco, Kharra, and similar products for one year throughout the NCT of Delhi in the interest of public health.
The petitioners argued that the impugned Notifications are arbitrary and violate the FSSAI, Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply, and Distribution) (COTPA), and abridge the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
It was claimed that Food Safety Commissioner exceeded his authority under the FSSA by issuing the disputed Notifications and has arbitrarily broadened the scope of Regulation 2.3.4 as he lacks the authority to legislate in a field occupied by the COTPA.
It was further argued that the authorities intend to ban an artificially created sub-category of tobacco, namely "smokeless tobacco," which includes chewing tobacco, pan masala, gutka, and other scheduled tobacco products listed under the COTPA.
On the contrary, the authorities argued that the Food Security Commissioner is well within his rights to issue the impugned notification, as he is empowered under Section 30(2)(a) of the FSSAI to prohibit the manufacture, storage, distribution, and sale of any food article, such as chewing tobacco, in the interest of public health and welfare.
The court then noted that Section 30(2)(a) stipulates that the maximum period for such prohibitory order may be passed is not more than one year. However, it stated that the impugned Notifications under challenge in the present case have been issued in a mechanical manner year after year without adhering to the general principles outlined in Sections 18 and 30(2)(a) of the FSSAI, which is a clear abuse of the powers conferred on the Commissioner of Food Safety under the FSSAI.
“This amounts to be an act which only the Legislature is entitled to exercise and no such power has been vested in the Commissioner of Food Safety in terms of the provisions of the FSSAI. Thus, it is clear that Respondent No.1 has exceeded its power and authority in issuance of the impugned Notifications in contravention of the powers conferred upon him under the FSSAI,” the court added.
Furthermore, the court stated that the Parliament has never intended to impose an absolute ban on the manufacture, sale, distribution, and storage of tobacco and/or tobacco products. However, the Parliament intends to regulate the trade and commerce of tobacco and tobacco products by the COTPA, a Central Act dealing with the tobacco industry.
Court also stated that the distinction sought to be made between smokeless tobacco and smoking tobacco to justify the issuance of the contested Notifications violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
Noting that the Food Safety Commissioner exceeded its power and authority in contravention of the powers vested in him under the FSSAI, the court quashed and set aside the impugned order. Accordingly, disposed of the pending applications.
Case Title: Sugandhi Snuff King Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Commissioner (Food Safety) Government of NCT of Delhi (a batch of petitions)
Please Login or Register
