SC Issues Notice On A Petition By A Supermarket Owner Raising Questions About The Responsibility Of Retailers And Manufacturers In Ensuring Food Safety
The Supreme Court has recently issued notice on a Special Leave Petition filed by B. Selvakumar, the owner of M/s. Cheers Ventures, a supermarket chain in Chennai. He approached the apex court assailing the decision of Madras High Court wherein the High Court had dismissed his appeal against a complaint by the Food Safety Officer of Adyar Zone, Chennai under Section 52 (1) and 59 (1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V Vishwanathan passed the order staying proceeding against the petitioner until further orders.
The case revolves around the alleged sale of misbranded and unsafe “Raja Snacks Mixture” at one of Selvakumar's supermarket branches in the year 2019. On February 27, 2019, the Food Safety Officer inspected the branch and took samples of the snack mixture for testing.
On March 01, 2019, a notice was issued to the Manufacturer to produce the requisite licenses immediately. Further on a letter explaining the delay in analysis was sent by the Food Analyst under Section 46(3)(iii) of the Act and under 2.3.2.(6) of the Rules and was received by the designated officer. The Food Analyst, delayed the analysis of the samples due to “administrative reasons,” and only submitted a report on February 13, 2020, almost a year later. The report stated that the sample was unsafe due to containing Tartrazine, a non-permitted coloring agent, and was misbranded for violating labeling regulations.
In his appeal before the High court, Selvakumar argued that the 11-month delay in analyzing an already expired product compromised the reliability of the test results. He further argues that as a retailer selling a product licensed by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), the primary liability for the product's quality and safety should lie with the manufacturer.
The High Court, however, disagreed with these arguments, statng that the seller is also responsible for ensuring the food products sold are not unsafe or misbranded. The High Court acknowledged the delay in the analysis but stated that the validity of the communication regarding the delay is a matter to be proven during the trial.
Selvakumar preferred a Special Leave Petition to the Supreme Court to overturn the High Court's decision. His counsel contended that the High Court erred in not recognizing the significance of the testing delay and in dismissing his argument based on his limited liability as a retailer. He emphasizes that holding retailers accountable for verifying the contents of every FSSAI-licensed product they sell is an unreasonable burden.
Cast Title: B. SELVAKUMAR V. STATE BY FOOD SAFETY OFFICER, ADYAR ZONE
Counsel For Petitioner: Vinay Navare Senior Advocate, Ashwin Kumar and Vishnu Kumar advocates,