TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 659X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eous matter, may seal the premises for investigation after taking a sample of such adulterant or food for analysis. The Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drugs, Administration Department had issued a notice to the petitioner on 31.03.2016 to produced the purchase and sales bills of raw materials purchased and the same was received by the petitioner on 02.04.2016 and till date, the petitioner/company had not produced the relevant documents to establish or to prove their Bonafide Transaction/action, the Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition filed by the writ petitioner is a premature and otiose one - petition disposed off - Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drugs, Administration Department, Karur, allowed to carry on necessary proceedings - decided against petitioner. - Writ Petition (MD).No.6751 of 2016, W.M.P.(MD).No.5820 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 9-8-2016 - M. Venugopal, J. For the Petitioner :Mr.S.R.Suresh Kumar For the Respondents :Mr.A.Muthukaruppan ORDER Heard both sides. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. Counter affidavit of the fifth respondent is filed. (ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings contemplated under the Rules and Regulations, formulated under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. 6.As a matter of fact, the fifth respondent/ Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Protection and Drugs, Administration Department, Karur District had forcefully locked and sealed the petitioner's premises without any order passed to that effect. The petitioner/company, in this regard, had addressed a representation, dated 02.03.2016 to the respondents, through registered post, requesting them to remove the lock and seal put up by the 5th respondent and allow it to run his business. But the fifth respondent had not considered his request till now. Also, he had approached the fifth respondent in person and asked for removal of the lock and seal. He also explained that he is the sole Proprietor of the Nigitha Trading Company and he is having licence to trade edible, non edible oil, fatty acids, waste gum, soap oils, rice brand oil, glycerin and rice brand oil gum and produced the licence copy and related papers. But his efforts ended in vain. 7.The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner takes a legal plea that the fifth respondent/Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Prote ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent/Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Protection and Drugs, Administration Department, Karur District, had visited the P.P.Oil Mills situated at Athirettipalayam, K.Paramathi, Aravakurichy Taluk, on 19.02.2016 and on that inspection, the said P.P.Oil Mill was found to be run by one A.N.Priya, W/o.Nehru and Punithavathi, W/o.Palanivel as a partnership firm and the unit was not functioning for the past 6 months and no employee was working at that premises. 10.In this connection, the Learned Counsel for the respondents brings it to the notice of the Court that the third respondent/District Collector, received a representation from the public that adulterated oil was processed in the petitioner's premises and in that process, the District Collector directed the Revenue, Police Officials and the 5th and 6th respondents to inspect the P.P.Oil Mill situated at Athirettipalayam, K.Paramathi and submit a report to him. As per direction issued, the above said officials and the 5th and 6th respondents had inspected the premises on 01.03.2016 and found that one P.P.Oil Mill situated in front of the premises, was closed before 6 months and there was no production in that unit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich 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 de ems 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 sub-section (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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Administration Department, had issued a notice to the petitioner on 31.03.2016 to produce the purchase and sales bills of the raw materials purchased by the petitioner and the same was received by him on 02.04.2016. However, the petitioner/company had not produced the necessary documents to show its bonafide business and in the mean while, it filed the present writ petition on 02.04.2016. 16.The pith and substance of the plea of the respondent Nos.1 to 6 is that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is per se not maintainable in Law and facts. Apart from that, as per Section 38 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, the Food Safety Officer has the requisite power to take a sample of any food or any substance which appears to him to be intended for sale, or to have been sold for human consumption etc., Further, as per Food Safety and Standards Rules 2.1.3(4), the fifth and sixth respondents are empowered to enter into the premises of the petitioner/Oil Company and take sample and seal the premises for the purpose of carrying out further investigation. 17.By way of reply, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Proprietor of the petitioner's compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Food Business Operator, the Food Safety Officers may seize the adulterant or food, which is unsafe or sub-standard or mis-branded or containing extraneous matter, may seal the premises for investigation after taking a sample of such adulterant or food for analysis. 21.Considering the fact that the fifth respondent/ Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drugs, Administration Department had issued a notice to the petitioner on 31.03.2016 to produced the purchase and sales bills of raw materials purchased and the same was received by the petitioner on 02.04.2016 and till date, the petitioner/company had not produced the relevant documents to establish or to prove their Bonafide Transaction/action, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition filed by the writ petitioner is a premature and otiose one. Consequently, the writ petition sans merits. 22.In fine, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. It is abundantly made clear by this Court that the dismissal of the writ petition will not preclude the fifth respondent/ Designated Officer, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drugs, Administration Department, Karur, to look ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
