IMPORTANT POINT
The responsibility of the authorities for strict implementation of food safety regulations and the need for specific instances of violation to support a petition.

ORDER :

Sunita Agarwal, J.

1. This is a wholly vague petition filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation seeking the following reliefs :-

“[A] YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other order or direction, directing the respondent authorities to implement the provisions of “Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 and other rules and regulations made there under urgently, strictly and in true spirit, to ascertain whether any green labelled food item contains any non-vegetarian ingredient and submit detailed report to this Hon’ble Court.

[B] YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent authorities to act urgently and periodically by obtaining samples of food items from open market, and doing inspection periodically at regular intervals and to carry out test thereon as per provisions of “Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006” and rules and regulations made there under, to ascertain whether any green labelled food item contains any non- vegetarian ingredient and submit detailed report to this Hon’ble Court.

[C] YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to produce and furnish necessary documents and information and other details as to how many prosecutions are being initiated in case of misbranding of food products which are not as per the vegetarian and non-vegetarian provisions of said regulation and Act.

[D] That pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to direct the respondent no.03 to obtain samples of all different types of food items sold in open market in the State of Gujarat, to ascertain whether any green labelled food item contains any non-vegetarian ingredient and submit detailed report to this Hon’ble Court.

[E] Any other appropriate relief deemed just, fit and proper may pleased be granted.”

2. At the outset, we may note that all prayers made in the Writ Petition are vague and in absence of specific prayer, pointing out any instance of violation of the provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011, it is not possible for us to issue any general mandamus asking the authorities to provide the documents and information and other details as to how many prosecutions are being initiated in case of misbranding of food products, which are not as per the vegetarian and non-vegetarian provisions of said Regulations. The prayers made in the Writ Petition to issue a general mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to act urgently and periodically by obtaining samples of food items from open market and making inspection periodically at regular intervals and to carry out test thereon as per provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, is too vague to entertain. In the first prayer made in the Writ Petition as noted herein above, a general mandamus is sought for to direct the respondents to implement the provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 made there under to ascertain whether any green labelled food item contains any non-vegetarian ingredient.

3. During the course of arguments, when this flaw in the prayers has been pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he has invited the attention of the Court to the order dated 31.08.2021 passed by this Court, wherein this Court has taken a note of Regulation 4 of Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 and further, the definitions in Regulation 1.2.11 of “Vegetarian Food”, “ingredient” defined under Section 3(y) and “food additive” defined under Section 3(k) of the Act, 2006. Noticing the said provisions, this Court has directed requiring the detailed affidavits from the