Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: food safety and standards act 2006 Page 2 of about 38,880 results (0.327 seconds)

Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Allahabad

..... it is accordingly directed that: (i) an appeal under section 70(1) of the food safety and standards act, 2006 against the decision of the adjudicating officer under section 68 before the food safety appellate tribunal would be treated as "civil miscellaneous appeal" and not as "criminal appeal". ..... this appeal styled as "criminal appeal" is preferred under section 71(6) of the food safety and standards act, 2006 (in short ''the act'), assailing the order dated 17.3.2015 in criminal appeal no. ..... (ii) the appeals filed under section 71(6) of the food safety and standards act, 2006 before this court be treated as an appeal from order and shall be dealt with on the civil side accordingly. ..... in view of aforesaid discussion, the court is of the view that both the adjudicating officer and the food safety appellate tribunal, while adjudging the quantum of penalty under chapter x of the act of 2006 were only exercising the powers of the civil court as their determination was only confined to the adjudication on the quantum of penalty and nothing else. ..... the appellant claims to be a petty food vendor engaged in the business under the act; on 9.11.2012 the food safety officer inspected his shop, purchased a sample of paneer, which as per report of public analyst was found to contain fats less than the prescribed limit of 50% hence, sample was found to be sub-standard. .....

M/S. Cargill India Private Limited Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others

Court : Uttaranchal

..... 14/2012 initiated by the food safety officer, roorkee for the alleged violation of section 3(1)(zf)(i)(a) and (b), 31(1)(zf)(b)(ii), section 3(1)(zx), section 24, section 26(2)(ii) and (v), section 27(2)(c) of the food safety and standards act, 2006 and regulation 2.2(3)(i), 2.3(5), 2.4.2(1) and 2.4.6(1) of the food safety and standards (packaging and labelling )regulations, 2011 punishable under sections 51, 52, 53 and 66 of food safety and standards act, 2006 before the adjudicating officer/additional district magistrate, haridwar. ..... of the petitioner has contended that in the old act the prevention of food adulteration ac, 1954, under sub-section (5) of section 13 provision was there that any document purporting to be a certificate signed by the director of the central food laboratory may be used as evidence of the facts stated there, but now the act has been repelled and with effect from 5.8.2011 the food safety and standards act, 2006 has come into force and section 46(4) deals with the function of food analyst and appeal to referral food laboratory. ..... by a perusal of section 46 of the food safety and standards act, 2006 shows that no provision was made what would be evidentiary value of the report of analyst and referral lab. ..... the time period 90 days will start as prescribed under proviso to sub-clause (9) of rule 3.1.1 of the food safety and standards rules, 2011 from the date fixed for hearing and that the case is at the stage of sub-clause (8) of the said rule. .....

K.K.R. Food Products, represented by it's Authorized Signatory Eldho P ...

Court : Kerala

..... it is noted that in spite of the notices issued under the food safety and standards act, 2006 (for short, the fss act ) the petitioner was continuing manufacture and sale of adulterated spices powder. ..... since the manufacturer did not stop the unscrupulous activity of adultering spices powder with cheaper starch, an order has been issued prohibiting manufacture, storage, sale, and distribution of the nirapara brand of chilly, turmeric, and coriander powder, manufactured by kkr food products, kalady, under relevant provisions of the food safety and standards act of india, to protect the interest of the consumers. 4. ..... the learned special government pleader heavily relied upon the provisions under sections 51 and 54 and under the fss act for imposing penalty for manufacturing or selling food articles of sub-standard and argued that the food safety and standards (food products standards and food additives) regulations, 2011 (for short, the food additives regulation 2011 ) clearly prohibit any added starch in the food products banned. i.g. ..... in exercise of the powers under section 92 of the fss act, a regulation was formulated by the food safety and standards authority of india under the title food safety and standards (prohibition and restrictions on sales) regulations, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the prohibition regulation 2011 ) it empowers prohibtion and restriction on sales of certain items of food referred therein. .....

Narayana Reddiar and Others Vs. State of Kerala, Rep. by Public Prosec ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2012(3)KLJ103; 2012(3)KLT408; 2012(3)ILR(Ker)614

..... notification reads: in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 97 of the food safety and standards act, 2006 (34 of 2006), the central government hereby repeals the enactments and orders in the second schedule of the food safety and standards act, 2006 and the milk and milk products regulations, 1992, with effect from 5th august, 2011" (underlined by me to lay ..... "in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 1 of the food safety and standards act, 2006 (34 of 2006), the central government hereby appoints the 29th day of july, 2010 as the day on which the provisions of sections 19 to 21 (both inclusive), sections 23 to 29 (both inclusive), sections 31 to 35 (both inclusive), sections 48 to 80 (both inclusive), section 89, sections 94 to 98 (both inclusive) and section 100 of the said act, shall come into force." 3. ..... act, 1954 was repealed by the food safety and standards act, 2006 ( ..... act is to consolidate the laws relating to food and to establish the food safety and standards authority of india for laying down science based standards for articles of food and to regulate their manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import, to ensure availability of safe and wholesome food for human consumption and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.that would support the argument advanced on behalf of the prosecution that the legislature never intended to create a vacuum where no provision was in force at the relevant time .....

Gahoi Food Private Limited Vs. Union of India

Court : Madhya Pradesh

..... submitted that the impugned order annexure p/1 is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and in accordance with the provisions of act of 2006, named as ''food safety and standard act, 2006'' and another act of 2003, named as ''the cigarettes and other tobacco products (prohibition of advertisement and regulation of trade and commerce, production, supply and distribution) act, 2003'', the appropriate authority has no power and jurisdiction to ban sale and use of gutka. ..... union of india and others [(2004) 7 scc 68] the ministry of health and family welfare department [food safety and standards authority of india] vide notification dated 1st august, 2011, in exercise of the powers conferred to it by clause (1) of subsection (2) of section 92 read with section 26 of food safety and standards act, 2006 (34 of 2006), made the regulations, named as ''food safety and standards (prohibition and restrictions on sales) ..... in the order that in accordance with the provisions of food safety and standards (prohibition and restrictions of sales), regulations, 2011, the production of any food products in which tobacco and nicotine used as ingredients, are prohibited. ..... company challenged the order dated 31-03-2012 (annexure p/1) issued by the commissioner, food safety, bhopal (mp). ..... the authorities shall take appropriate steps that the food products contains tobacco and nicotine as gutka shall not be permitted to manufacture or sale in the areas and no licence can be issued in this .....

M/s. Thillaikkarasi Sago Factory, Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by ...

Court : Chennai

..... the food safety officer suspected that the sago may be adulterated and may not satisfy the parameters laid down under the food safety and standards act, 2006 (for short the act ) and the ..... salem food analysis laboratory's report and the kolkatta referral food laboratory's report stated that the sago is unsafe for consumption, the designated officer made ready the papers and sent the same to the office of the commissioner of food safety and drug administration, chennai under section 42(3) of the act, and the commissioner of food safety communicated his decision to the designated officer on 07.10.2015, to prosecute the petitioner before the court of ordinary jurisdiction (under section 42(4a) of the act) ..... the matter is remitted to the commissioner of food safety, office of the commissioner of food safety and drug administration, to apply his mind on the facts and circumstances of the case and pass orders in accordance with law under proviso to section 77 of the act, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy ..... in the result, the order dated 01.10.2015 passed by the commissioner of food safety, office of the commissioner of food safety and drug administration, chennai-6, condoning the delay in filing the prosecution is hereby ..... the opinion of this court, the commissioner of food safety has not approached the issue with the solemnity it requires and has in a cavalier manner, exercised the powers under the proviso to section 77 of the act, by saying that the delay was due to .....

E. Jacob Varghese Vs. State of Kerala represented by the Chief Secreta ...

Court : Kerala

..... that apart, the averments with regard to ext.p8 report of the food safety officer, it is contended by the 2nd respondent that, as per the food safety and standards act, the standards for drinking water is fixed only for mineral water and packaged drinking water, and the powers and duties of the food safety officer are laid down under the food safety and standards act, 2006. ..... by the petitioner that, in that regard, petitioner had secured ext.p8 reply dated 26.02.2014 from the 6th respondent food safety officer, chengannoor circle, under the right to information act, 2005, wherein it is observed that the water source at pannaikadavu is polluted and not safe as per the standards stipulated by the bureau of indian standards (bis) for drinking purpose and also the available water treatment system at the water treatment plant at karumady is not equipped with the required ..... in fact, the project engineer of the 2nd respondent has submitted an application dated 05.02.2015 under the right to information act, making certain queries to the food safety officer regarding ext.p8 reply furnished by him, evident from ext.r2 (e) and thereupon 6th respondent has furnished reply dated 16.02.2015, evident from ext.r2(f). .....

Gene Campaign . Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... page 4 of 260 era environmental risk assessment fao food and agriculture organization fssa, food safety and standards act, 2006 2006 fssai food safety and standards authority of india ge genetically engineered geac genetic engineering appraisal committee gef global environment facility geo genetically engineered organism gm gene modification or genetically modified gmo genetically modified organisms hpv human papilloma virus ht herbicide tolerant or tolerance iaastd international assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development iari indian agricultural research institute ibsc institutional biosafety committee ..... while the moef, on 23.08.2007, exempted all gm food categories from regulations under rule 11 if the end product was not an lmo, the mohfw did not include gm foods from the restrictions on manufacture, distribution and selling when it issued the notification under section 22, food safety and standards act, 2006 (for short, fssa, 2006 ). ..... further, at present matters related to processed gm foods is being dealt under section 22 of the food safety and standards act (2006), which has not yet been operationalised. ..... the food safety and standards act, 2006 is aimed at laying down science based standards for articles of food and to ensure 26 | w.p. .....

Swami Achyutanand Tirth and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... as directed by this court by order dated 10.12.2014, it will be in order that the union of india come up with suitable amendments in the food safety and standards act, 2006 and the respondent-union of india shall also make penal provisions at par with the provisions contained in the state amendments as indicated above.21. ..... vide its order dated 10.12.2014, this court directed union of india to come up with necessary amendments in food safety and standards act, 2006 and also in the indian penal code to make penal provisions at par with state amendments.13. ..... as the parliament has enacted food safety and standards act, 2006 and regulations, 2011 which are effective in taking care of the food safety and standards, it becomes, therefore, important to firstly refer to the legislative efforts made by the union of india. ..... as the question of invoking sections 272/273 ipc for violation under food safety and standards act, 2006 is sub judice in the said criminal appeals, we are not inclined to go into the said question. ..... on 13.03.2014, counsel appearing for the union of india produced a letter dated 12.03.2014 of the ministry of health and family welfare wherein it has been stated that under the chairmanship of the chairman of fssai, it has been decided to seek approval of the government for initiating the process of amendment of the food safety and standards act 2006 in the light of the observations made by this court. .....

Ganesh Pandurang Jadhao and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Throu ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... b) the food safety officers are not prohibited from proceeding against applicants / petitioners under the provisions of chapter x of the food safety and standards act, 2006. ..... section 42 of the food safety and standards act, 2006, reads as under :- 42. ..... in order to find out answer to this question, one must read the provisions of the food safety and standards act, 2006. ..... section 30 of the act provides that a commissioner of food safety of the state should be appointed for efficient implementation of food safety and standards. ..... the act establishes food safety and standards authority of india. ..... he alleged that he not only seized the goods but even lodged a police complaint alleging that the petitioner had committed violation of government notification, dated 15th may, 2014, prohibiting certain acts pertaining to gutka/pan masala and thereby committed offence punishable under sections 26 and 30 of the food and safety standards act, 2006 (in short, fss act, 2006). ..... it is an admitted fact that the fss act, 2006, empowered food and safety commissioner, state of maharashtra, under section 30 of the fss act, 2006, prohibiting sale, manufacture etc. ..... on careful perusal of provisions of chapter ix and x of the fss act, 2006 and the prohibitory order issued by the commissioner, it appears to us that contravention of prohibitory order would amount to failure to comply with directions of food safety officers as contemplated in s.55, which provided penal action. .....