SAI BEVERAGE Vs. S A APARNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have approached this Court by way of these petitions against the action of respondent municipal Corporation in sealing the factory premises wherefrom the petitioners are carrying on their business activities of filtering/purifying water and selling drinking water in bottles (kerba ). It is the case of the petitioners that in view of the provisions contained in the Prevention of Food adulteration Act more particularly under section 2 (v) of the said Act, which defines the term 'food', the product of the petitioners would not fall in its purview inasmuch as "water" is excluded from the said definition. It is the further case of the petitioners that their activity cannot be said to be an activity of marketing "packaged water". On such grounds, the petitioners have assailed the action of the respondent Corporation as well as the authority of respondent Corporation of taking actions against the petitioners.

(2.) MR. Nanavati had earlier sought adjournment in the petitions on the ground that the Corporation wants to file reply affidavit. Despite 2 adjournments, reply affidavit has not been filed. It appears that the respondent Corporation, apart from its contentions regarding its authority to take actions under the provisions of the said Act, is also trying to justify its action on the ground that it is its responsibility to ensure public health- hygiene and safety which authorises it to take appropriate preventive measures as well and that therefore the action is justified as it is based on the un-derstanding of the Corporation that the water being sold by the petitioners is not safe for human consumption. It appears that such plea is based on the premise that the petitioners have not been able to produce, when asked for, the certificate from Health department or the fitness certificate certifying the quality of the product in question.

(3.) NOTWITHSTANDING the petitioners' objections as regards maintainability of respondent Corporation's action and/or its authority to take any steps against the petitioner, this Court would not permit the petitioners to continue with their activities unless they satisfy the concerned authorities about the quality of the water. In that view of the matter, it is incumbent upon the petitioners to obtain necessary certificate from the health Department as well as Laboratory test reports for their produce, i. e. , water.