Heart Land Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs Union of India and Others

Dipankar Datta, J.—The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of on 24th January, 2014 with a direction upon the respondent No. 2 to inspect the oil imported by the petitioner and to take expeditious steps for its clearance upon chemical analysis as early as possible. In compliance with the said order, an order has been passed on 6th February, 2014 by the Deputy Director, Eastern Region, Kolkata. He has recorded in such order that the oil imported by the petitioner have not been properly labelled in terms of the provisions contained in the Food Safety and Standard (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011. Mr. Sen, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted, referring to guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare dated 23rd March, 2012, that the oil imported by the petitioner does not require labelling in terms thereof and that an objection to the order dated 6th February, 2014 has duly been lodged, which is yet to be considered by the Deputy Director. Learned advocate for the respondents has, however, supported the order dated 6th February, 2014 by referring to the Regulations.

I am of the view that keeping the writ petition pending and inviting affidavits would only delay a decision on whether the petitioner is entitled to clearance or not. Since it is submitted by Mr. Sen that such imported oil have been cleared by the Customs Authorities in other metropolitan cities and particularly having regard to the fact that the objection lodged by the petitioner is yet to be attended to by the Deputy Director, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction upon such Deputy Director to consider the grievance highlighted on behalf of the petitioner by his learned advocate in the notice (appearing at pages 110-115 of the writ petition) upon granting the petitioner or its authorized representative reasonable opportunity of hearing as early as possible but not later than a fortnight from date. If the petitioner''s grievance is found to be without merit, a reasoned order shall be passed. On the contrary, if the petitioner''s grievance has merit, follow up steps, in accordance with law, shall be taken without any delay.

Needless to observe, no point has been examined on merit and all points are left open to be urged by the petitioner before the Deputy Director.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.

Having heard learned advocates for the parties and considering the nature of the order impugned in this writ petition, I am of the considered view that the writ petition cannot be decided without inviting affidavits.

Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by 8th May, 2014; reply thereto, if any, may be filed by 12th May, 2014.

ACO put up the writ petition for final disposal on 13th May, 2014 before the regular hearing Bench subject to convenience of the learned Judge. There shall be an interim order directing the respondent to test the samples of Canola oil in accordance with law for the purpose of ascertaining whether the quality thereof conforms to the standard mentioned in the Food Safety and Standard Act and the rules framed thereunder. The report of testing shall be enclosed with the affidavit-in-opposition to be filed by the respondents.