Ramkumar, J.

This revision comes up for consideration before us on a reference made by a learned Judge, Justice M. Sasidharan Nambiar. According to the learned Judge, decisions of this Court in Food Inspector V. Sivarama Menon (1990 (1) KLT 393) and Beena V. State of Kerala (2010(2) KLT SN 17 (Case No.21) were rendered without adverting to an earlier decision of this Court in Krishnankutty Nair V. George (1986 KLT 871) and the ratio in those two decisions (Food Inspector V. Sivarama Menon (Supra) and Beena V. State of Kerala) (Supra) as well as the ratio in an unreported decision in Crl.R.P.No.140/1977 holding the view that the presence of talc (Magnesium silicate), which is neither a colouring matter nor a pigment in the very same food grain namely, black gram dhal, does not attract the prohibition under Rule 27 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (the Rules for short) is ignoring the fact that even if talc is not a colouring matter or a pigment, talc is not a permitted inorganic matter as per the Explanation to the standard in A.18.06 in Appendix B to the Rules.

2. We heard Advocate Sri. Santhosh Subramanian, the learned counsel appearing for the revisi