The Supreme Court has voiced its displeasure regarding a compliance affidavit submitted by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) in a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding mandatory front-of-package warning labels for packaged edibles, as reported by LiveLaw.
A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan reviewed a miscellaneous application in a PIL initiated by 3S and Our Health Society. The petition urged the Central government to implement clear front-of-package warnings detailing the sugar, salt, and saturated fat content in processed food items.
The original writ petition was disposed on April 9, 2025, following assurances to the apex court that the FSSAI had commenced the process of introducing front-of-pack nutrition labeling. This was to be achieved via proposed modifications to the Food Safety and Standards (Labeling and Display) Regulations, 2020.
During that phase, the court instructed an FSSAI-appointed expert committee to draft recommendations and provide a report within a three months to facilitate the necessary regulatory updates.
In the current case, the bench scrutinized the compliance affidavit dated January 30, 2026, submitted by Dr. Kavitha Ramasamy, FSSAI Joint Director.
The document revealed that the expert committee found a lack of consensus among industry stakeholders concerning the Indian Nutrition Rating model proposed in 2022. The committee highlighted doubts regarding the star-rating algorithm’s effectiveness, asserting that its practical feasibility could not be evaluated without first putting the model into operation.
Additionally, the affidavit mentioned the Draft Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Amendment Regulations, 2025 — notified in February 2025 — which suggested, among other things, displaying nutritional data in bold typeface.
Nonetheless, it was noted that the food authority postponed the matter during its 49th meeting on November 24, 2025, intending to revisit it in a future session, the report said.
Furthermore, the FSSAI signaled its plan to perform deeper research, map packaged foods systematically by category, conduct consumer surveys on label engagement, study international trends in nutrition labeling, and engage in broader discussions with stakeholders, including smaller enterprises, prior to moving forward.
The court observed, however, that the efforts made thus far appeared to have produced no tangible or constructive outcomes. It emphasized that the PIL addresses a critical concern regarding the public’s fundamental right to health.
The bench also noted the petitioner’s proposal that pre-packaged items should feature a direct warning label on the wrapper or container, highlighting that such practices are a standard global health measure.
“Prima-facie, we are of the view that whatever exercise has been undertaken so far has not yielded any positive or good result. The PIL was filed with a particular purpose. It raised an important issue as regards the right to health of the citizens of this country. Today, what has been suggested by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also makes some sense and we want the authority to take this aspect into consideration,” the bench said.
