MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT AND VEGETABLE PVT. LTD.  Vs SH. HUKAM SINGH

W.P.(C) 897/2021 Page 1 of 3$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 22ndJanuary, 2021
+ W.P.(C) 897/2021 and CM APPL. 2381/2021
MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT AND VEGETABLE
PVT. LTD. ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vivek Sood, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Firoz Khan, Advocate.
versus
SH. HUKAM SINGH ….. Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing.
CM APPL. 2380/2021 (for exemption)
2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is
disposed of.
W.P.(C) 897/2021 and CM APPL. 2381/2021
3. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 7th
February, 2020, passed by the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi,
inFSAT No. 49/16 , titled Mother Dairy Fruit and Vegetable Pvt. Ltd. v.
FSO, vide which the penalty amounting to Rs. 40,000/- imposed by the
Adjudicating Officer on the Petitioner in the order dated 25thNovember,
2016, has been upheld.
4. Submission of Mr. Sood, ld. Senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the Petitioner is that under Section 71 of the Food Safety and Standard Act,
2006 ( hereinafter, “the Act” ), a second appeal on any question of fact or
law, against the order of the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal, lies before the
2021:DHC:254W.P.(C) 897/2021 Page 2 of 3High Court. However, according to him, the Registry of the Court has
informed the counsel that the matter should be filed as a writ petition and
not as a second appeal.
5. Section 71(6) of the Act reads as under :-
“71. Procedure and powers of Tribunal.
……..
(6) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order
of the Tribunal may file an appeal to the High
Court within sixty days from the date of
communication of the decision or order of the
Tribunal to him on any question of fact or law
arising out of such order: Provided that the High
Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was
prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal
within the said period, allow it to be filed within a
further period not exceeding sixty days.”
A perusal of the above provision shows that an appeal would lie before this
court against an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, within 60 days from
the communication of the said decision or order. Vide judgment dated 13th
March 2019, a ld. Single judge considered this issue in Ardor Restaurant
and ors. v. Bal Mukund (WP(C) 10418/2018) and held that a writ filed
against the order of the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal ought to be treated
as an appeal under section 71(6) of the Act. The said order reads:
“1. Although, the present petition has been styled
as writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, it ought to be treated as an
appeal under Section 71(6) of the Food Safety and
Standards Act, 2006 (hereafter ‘the FSS Act’).”
6. In view of the clear legal position, the present writ may be
renumbered as a ‘Regular Second Appeal’ by the Registry and be listed
2021:DHC:254W.P.(C) 897/2021 Page 3 of 3before the Roster Bench.
7. Ld. counsel for the Petitioner submits that he was informed by the
Registry that the category for regular second appeals does not exist as of
now. In view thereof, the Registry may also make provision in its IT
Software for appropriately numbering such second appeals arising under the
Act.
8. List before the Roster Bench on 1stFebruary, 2021.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
JANUARY 22, 2021
MR/Ak
2021:DHC:254