RAJU LAXMAN PACHAPURE Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue that arises for our consideration in W. P. No. 15119/2006, a public interest litigation filed in the year 2006, is whether respondent be directed to take appropriate action against 6th respondent industry based on the representation of petitioner dated 11-9-2006 for manufacturing gutkha product which undisputedly falls within the definition of "food" defined u/s. 2 (v) of Prevention of Food Adulteration act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as PFA Act)on the ground the samples of Gutka which is admittedly manufactured by 6th respondent contains use of anticaking agent viz. , magnesium carbonate which is barred under Rule 62 of PFA Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as PFA Rules), is a major public health hazard.

(2.) WHEN the matter came originally for admission on 4-6-2008, this Court passed the following interim order :

(3.) PURSUANT to the said direction dated 4-6-2008, the Commissioner of Food and Civil supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, bangalore filed report dated 16-8-2008 which reads as hereunder :