Why in news?

The Uttar Pradesh government has recently mandated that food establishments prominently display the names of the operator, proprietor, manager, and relevant personnel to customers.

Similarly, Himachal Pradesh’s minister proposed requiring eateries and fast-food carts to display the owner’s ID. However, this proposal was disowned by the Himachal government.

Earlier, on July 22, the Supreme Court stayed similar orders issued by police in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand for the kanwar yatra, stating that only the competent authority under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) could issue such directives. The court emphasized that the police could not take over this authority.

What’s in today’s article?

• Regulations for selling food in India
• Powers of State Governments Under the FSSAI
• Legal Challenges to UP and Uttarakhand Directives issued earlier

Regulations for selling food in India

• FSSAI Registration for Food Businesses
  • Anyone wishing to operate a food business in India must register or obtain a license from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
  • This body, established under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA), is responsible for monitoring and regulating food processing, distribution, sale, and import to ensure food safety and quality.
• Registration for Small-Scale Food Businesses
  • According to the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Rules, 2011, small-scale food businesses—including petty food manufacturers, hawkers, vendors, and stallholders—are required to register with the FSSAI.
  • Once the registration is approved, the petty food manufacturer receives a registration certificate and a photo identity card, which must be displayed prominently at all times within the business premises, vehicle, or cart.
• Licensing for Larger Food Businesses
  • Operators of relatively large food businesses are required to obtain a license from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
  • Similar to the registration for small-scale businesses, this license must be prominently displayed at all times within the premises where the food business is conducted.
• Display of Owner's Identity and Location
  • In both cases—whether for small-scale food manufacturers or larger operators—the owner's identity and the establishment's location are already mandated to be displayed through the photo ID and the license issued by FSSAI.
• Penalties for Operating Without a License
  • According to Section 63 of the FSSA, any operator conducting a food business without a valid license may face penalties of up to six months in prison and a fine of up to ₹5 lakh.
• Other compliances and penalties under the FSSA
  • Improvement Notice
    • Under Section 31 of the FSSA, if a Food Business Operator (FBO) fails to comply with any provision of the Act or its regulations, the food authority can issue an Improvement Notice. This notice will detail:
      • Grounds for believing the FBO has failed to comply.
      • Required measures for compliance.
      • A minimum compliance period of 14 days.
  • Consequences of Non-Compliance
    • If an FBO fails to comply with the Improvement Notice:
      • Their licence may be suspended.
      • In cases of further non-compliance, the licence may be cancelled.
  • General Penalties
  • The UP directives do not specify penalties for non-compliance with the new requirements.
  • However, under Section 58, for contraventions without a specific penalty, fines may reach ₹2 lakh.
  • Repeat Offenses
    • If an FBO is convicted twice for the same offense (including under Section 58), they may face:
      • Double the penalty for the first conviction.
      • A daily fine that can reach up to ₹1 lakh.
      • Potential loss of their licence as outlined in Section 64.

Powers of State Governments Under the FSSA

• Legal provision
  • Section 94(1) of the FSSA grants state governments the authority to make rules, subject to the approval of the Food Authority and the Central Government.
  • This allows them to carry out functions and duties assigned to them under the Act.
• Rule-Making Authority
  • Section 94(2) outlines the specific areas where state governments can make rules:
    • Section 94(2)(a): States can create rules regarding the "other functions" of the Commissioner of Food Safety as described in Section 30(2)(f), which includes a broad mandate for the Commissioner to perform additional functions as prescribed by the state government in consultation with the Food Authority.
    • Section 94(2)(c): This provision allows state governments to make rules for any other matter that may need to be prescribed or regulated by the state.
• Role of the Commissioner of Food Safety
• The Commissioner of Food Safety, appointed by the state government under Section 30, is responsible for ensuring the efficient implementation of the FSSA and its accompanying regulations.
• The specific functions outlined in Sections 30(2)(a) to (e) include conducting surveys, training programs, and approving prosecutions for offenses.
• Legislative Approval Requirement
  • According to Section 94(3), any rules made by the state government must be presented to the state legislature for approval as soon as possible.

Legal Challenges to UP and Uttarakhand Directives

• Allegations of Discrimination
  • The earlier directives from the police in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand were challenged in the Supreme Court on the grounds that they effectively forced individuals to disclose their religious and caste identities.
  • Petitioners argued that these orders discriminated against citizens based on religion, violating Article 15(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth.
• Concerns About Economic Boycott
  • The petitioners claimed that the directives could lead to the economic boycott of Muslim minorities, infringing on their right to practice any profession under Article 19(1)(g).
  • They also contended that the orders supported the practice of untouchability, which is banned under Article 17.
• Government's Justification
  • In response to these challenges, the UP government stated that the recent directives, which include the installation of CCTV cameras at food establishments and a state-wide verification campaign, aim to enhance public health.
  • They cited reports of food adulteration incidents involving human waste and other unsanitary substances, emphasizing the need for measures to ensure food safety and protect public health in the state.