Dabur moves Delhi HC against FSSAI order banning ‘100%’ claims on honey, ghee and other products

Dabur Moves Delhi HC Against FSSAI Over Product Claims Ban

Theindiapostdaily.com – Dabur moves Delhi HC against the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) by filing a petition challenging a recent order that banned the use of “100 per cent” claims on several of its food products. The pharmaceutical and consumer goods company argued that the regulator failed to issue a prior show-cause notice and denied Dabur a fair opportunity to present its case before imposing the restrictions. According to PTI, the matter was brought before a bench headed by Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya for urgent consideration. The petition is scheduled for hearing on Friday before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

Understanding the FSSAI Prohibition Order

The regulatory dispute originated from an FSSAI prohibition order issued earlier this week, which targeted multiple products marketed with absolute purity claims. Under the directive, Dabur was required to halt the sale of items including honey, apple cider vinegar, virgin coconut oil, sesame oil, cow ghee, coconut water, and coconut milk. These products carried various claims such as “100 per cent Natural,” “100 per cent Pure,” “100 per cent Purity Guaranteed,” “100 per cent Organic,” and “100 per cent Tender Coconut Water.”

The FSSAI maintained that these assertions violated the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018. According to the authority, such blanket claims were considered ambiguous, difficult to verify, and potentially misleading to consumers who might interpret them as guarantees of product composition. Additionally, the regulator mandated that Dabur submit an Action Taken Report within fifteen days of receiving the order.

Dabur’s Legal Challenge and Arguments

In its petition, Dabur challenged the prohibition order on multiple grounds, asserting that it contravened established principles of natural justice and applicable statutory provisions. The company emphasized that the FSSAI did not issue a show-cause notice before passing the order, nor did it provide Dabur with an opportunity for a hearing. Furthermore, Dabur contended that the regulator exceeded its statutory authority in issuing a prohibitory order and characterized the directive as “non-speaking,” meaning it lacked sufficient reasoning and was passed without proper application of mind.

The company also highlighted that the term “100 per cent” is commonly employed by numerous major food brands across various product categories. Dabur argued that the public release of the prohibition order had unfairly tarnished its reputation in the market. The legal challenge seeks to have the order set aside or modified to reflect due process and reasonable regulatory action.

Background: Earlier Regulatory Findings

The current dispute builds upon previous regulatory observations made by the FSSAI regarding Dabur’s product labeling practices. The authority had previously noted that Dabur Himalayan Organic Apple Cider Vinegar and Dabur Organic Honey displayed the Jaivik Bharat logo without holding a valid FSSAI organic endorsement. This discrepancy raised concerns about misleading consumers regarding the organic status of these products.

Additionally, the FSSAI had objected to Dabur Hommade Coconut Milk being marketed with the claim “100 per cent Purity.” The regulator stated that such absolute claims are not permitted for compound food products under existing advertising regulations. Despite being directed to discontinue these claims, the FSSAI found that Dabur had not taken satisfactory corrective action, prompting the issuance of the broader prohibition order.

Industry Implications and Consumer Impact

This case has significant implications for the food and beverage industry, particularly for companies that rely on purity and quality claims to differentiate their products in competitive markets. The FSSAI’s strict interpretation of “100 per cent” claims may require brands to revise their marketing materials and ensure compliance with evolving regulatory standards. Consumers, too, may benefit from clearer and more verifiable product claims as the regulatory landscape evolves.

Legal experts suggest that the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how food regulators approach absolute claims in product marketing. If Dabur succeeds in having the order overturned or modified, it may encourage other companies to challenge similar regulatory directives. Conversely, if the FSSAI’s position is upheld, it could lead to a broader review of purity claims across the industry.

FAQ: Common Questions About the Case

What products are affected by the FSSAI order? The order affects honey, apple cider vinegar, virgin coconut oil, sesame oil, cow ghee, coconut water, coconut milk, and other products carrying “100 per cent” claims.

Why did Dabur approach the Delhi High Court? Dabur moved the Delhi HC because it believed the FSSAI violated principles of natural justice by not issuing a show-cause notice or providing an opportunity for a hearing before passing the prohibition order.

What regulations does the FSSAI cite in its order? The FSSAI cites the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, which govern the use of claims in food product advertising.

What is the timeline for Dabur’s response? Dabur was directed to submit an Action Taken Report within 15 days of receiving the FSSAI order.

How might this case affect other food brands? The outcome could influence how food brands use absolute claims like “100 per cent” in their marketing, potentially leading to revised labeling practices across the industry.