Delhi High Court Upholds FSSAI Regulation To Enhance Statutory Warning Size On Pan Masala Packages

The Delhi High Court has upheld the Regulation issued by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) in October 2022 enhancing the size of statutory warning on pan masala packages from 3mm to 50% of front-of-pack of the label.

A division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora dismissed the plea filed by Dharampal Satyapal Limited, licensed manufacturer of Pan Masala brands namely, Rajnigandha, Tansen, and Mastaba.

The plea challenged Regulation 2(i) of the Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Second Amendment Regulations, 2022. It also sought a declaration that the m Regulation was ultra vires the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Vide the impugned Regulation, the size of statutory warning on Pan Masala packages was enhanced to the extent of 50% of front-of-pack of the label from the erstwhile warning size of 3mm.

The court said that the increase in size of warning statements from 3mm to 50% of front-of-pack of label is an effective alternative and does not disproportionately impact the rights of the Petitioners.

Observing that the impugned Regulation meets the test of proportionality, the bench said:

“The perusal of the expert Reports and guidelines dated 6th December, 2018 of the MoHFW, in fact, shows that though there is a worldwide recommendation for banning the product of Pan Masala, yet the Food Authority has for the present only taken the limited step of increasing the warning size.”

It added: “The resistance of the Petitioners to the increase in the warning size while accepting the existence of the health hazard of the Pan Masala, as evidenced by the expert studies, shows that the Petitioners are only seeking to subserve their personal interest without having regard for the public health.”

Furthermore, the bench observed that the impugned Regulation gives effect to the legislative intent of safeguarding the larger public interest which is paramount and that larger public interest of public health would outweigh the individual loss to the manufacturer or licensee.

“In the present case, the impugned Regulation has been introduced in the interest of the larger public health, to raise awareness among consumers about the risk associated with chewing Pan Masala. The Petitioners' challenge to the impugned Regulation seems to be driven by its self-interest in safeguarding the sale of its Pan Masala brands, which might be affected if they comply with the impugned Regulation,” it said.

The court noted that the petitioners were granted sufficient time by FSSAI between May 01, 2023 until April 30, 2024, to change the packaging of its product and comply with the impugned Regulation w.e.f. May 01, 2024.

Since there was no interim stay granted in favour of the petitioners, the bench said that they have no justification for not complying with the impugned Regulation upon its coming into effect.

“In view of our findings on the vires of the impugned Regulation, we are not inclined to grant any further time to the Petitioner for permitting transition of the packaging of its product,” it said.

Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. C. S. Vaidyanathan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Kohli, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nalin Talwar, Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Mrs. Bhavya Bhatia, Mr. Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Mrs. Bhavya Bhatia, Mrs. Shashi Pathak, Mr. Aashish Kaushik, Mr. Jatin Nirwan, Ms. Divyanshi Mohan, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda, Govt. Pleader, for R-1/UOI; Mr. Aditya Singla, Ms. Supriya Juneja, Ms. Saakshi Garg, Mr. Ritwik Saha and Mr. Rahul, Advocates for R-2/FSSAI

Title: DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LIMITED AND ANR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 767

Click here to read order