JUDGMENT

(Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents herein to remove the seal put on the petitioner shop at situated at Thuvakudi, Thanjavur Main Road, Trichy District forthwith on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 18.12.2023.)

1. The writ petitioners are running petty shops. On 16.12.2023, the second respondent and a team of officials inspected their shops. According to the second respondent, the petitioners were keeping banned tobacco products for sale. The shops were also locked and sealed. Seeking removal of the seals, the present writ petitions came to be filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions and called upon this Court to grant relief as prayed for.

3. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the petitions deserve summary dismissal. He pointed out that sale of gutka and such other products is having a serious bearing on public health. He submitted that such acts constitute a menace to the society. The statutory provisions set out in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the rules framed thereunder empower the designated officer to lock and seal the premises where the contraband is kept. He relied on the order dated 13.12.2023 made in WP No. 34737 of 2023 and 23.12.2020 made in WP(MD)No.14618 of 2020 etc., He called upon this Court to dismiss the writ petitions.

4. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. Section 38 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 sets out the powers of Food Safety Officer. It is as follows:

“38. Powers of Food Safety Officer.

(1) The Food Safety Officer may – (a) take a sample – (i) of any food, or any substance, which appears to him to be intended for sale, or to have been sold for human consumption; or (ii) of any article of food or substance which is found by him on or in any such premises; which he has reason to believe that it may be required as evidence in proceedings under any of the provisions of this Act or of the regulations or orders made thereunder; or

(b) seize any article of food which appears to the Food Safety Officer to be in contravention of this Act or the regulations made thereunder; and

(c) keep it in the safe custody of the food business operator such article of food after taking a sample; and in both cases send the same for analysis to a Food Analyst for the local area within which such sample has been taken: Provided that where the Food Safety Officer keeps such article in the safe custody of the food business operator, he may require the food business operator to execute a bond for a sum of money equal to the value of such article with one or more sureties as the Food Safety Officer deems fit and the food business operator shall execute the bond accordingly.

(2) The Food Safety Officer may enter and inspect any place where the article of food is manufactured, or stored for sale, or stored for the manufacture of any other article of food, or exposed or exhibited for sale and where any adulterant is manufactured or kept, and take samples of such articles of food or adulterant for analysis.

(3) Where any sample is taken, its cost calculated at the rate at which the article is usually sold to the public shall be paid to the person from whom it is taken.

(4) Where any article of food seized under clause (b) of subsection (1) is of a perishable nature and the Food Safety Officer is satisfied that such article of food is so deteriorated that it is unfit for human consumption, the Food Safety Officer may, after giving notice in writing to the food business operator, cause the same to be destroyed.

(5) The Food Safety Officer shall, in exercising the powers of e