The term "any financial interest" in the proviso to Section 9(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, should be interpreted literally and includes any financial interest, however indirect or insignificant, in the manufacture, import, or sale of food items.

( 1 ) THE following question has beenreferred TO by the learned Judges of the Division Bench (Jagjit Singh andm. S. Joshi, JJ) by their order of reference dated August II. 1975. for decision of the full Bench :

"whether holding one or more shares in the Municipal Corporation Cooperative Stores Limited or in any other cooperativesociety or company, engaged in the manufacture, importor sale of any article of food, amounts to having financialinterest in the manufacture, import or sale of articles offood for purposes of the proviso to sub-section (1) ofsection 9 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act,1954".

( 2 ) LALA Bishambar Dayal, learned counsel for the appellant inthe criminal appeal out of which the present reference has arisen,raised a preliminary objection that the reference itself is incompetentas this question does not arise on the facts of this case. It wassubmitted by the learned counsel that the question, whether the Foodinspector who took the sample in the present case was duly appointedor not, was not raised in the courts below and, therefore, it cannot beraised in the present appeal and even if the appointment of the Foodinspector is invalid within the meaning of section 9 (1) of the prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, it cannot be raised during thehearing of the criminal appeal. It was also submitted that on the factsof this case, it would have no effect and, therefore, the full Benchshould decline to answer the question.

( 3 ) WHETHER the respondents can raise these questions or witherthese questions will arise in the criminal appeal are matters for decision of the Division Bench who hears the appeal. We would be enlargingthe scope of reference if we go into the preliminary objections raised bythe learned counsel which, we are afraid, we are neither competent togo into nor are we inclined to go into at this stage. These are all matterswhich the appellant would be free to urge before the Division Benchwhich hears the appeal and our answer to the reference would in noway prevent the learned counsel to make his submissions before thedivision Bench after the reference has been answered.

( 4 ) IT appears that the reference has been made by the learned Judges of the Division Bench in view of the conflict in the observationsof this Court (Rangarajan and Prakash Narain, JJ) in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Takhat Ram (1974 Prevention of Food Adulteration Cases 232) (1) and the decision of the Chief Justice Falshawand Mehar Singh, J. in an unreported decision in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Rajev and another : (Criminal Appeal No. 169-D of1962 decided on 11-2-1965) (2 ). Whereas the decision of the learnedjudges of this Court in the aforesaid case of Takhat Ram related tothe interpretation of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 9 in relationto the appointment of Food Inspector, the decision of the learnedjudges of the Division Bench of the Cricuit Bench of the Punjab Highcourt related to the interpretation of an identical proviso to Section8 in relation to the appointment of a public analyst.

( 5 ) THE relevant provisions of Sections 8 and 9 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as "the Act")may be reproduced for facility of understanding and determining thescope of relevant provisos :

"8. Public Analysts :-The Central Government or the Stategovernment may, by notification in the Official Gazette,appoint such persons as it thinks fit, having the prescribedqualifications to be public analysts for such local areasas may be assigned to them by the Central Governmentor the State Government, as the case may be :

PROVIDED that no person who has any financial interest in themanirfacture, import or sale of any article of food shallbe appointed to be a public analyst under this section :

PROVIDED further that different public analysts may be appointedfor different articles of food.

( 6 ) FOOD inspectors :- (1) The Central Government or thestate Government may