The Delhi High Court on Friday signalled that it will not interfere with the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India’s (FSSAI) directive withdrawing permission for food and beverage companies to use the term “ORS” on their products unless they conform to the standard medical formulation prescribed for Oral Rehydration Solutions.
Justice Sachin Datta, hearing a plea filed by Dr Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd, observed that “public health hazard cannot be allowed to continue as health of the citizens is paramount.”
“It is a health hazard… What I propose to do is this — this embargo will continue. I am not disturbing this embargo given the public health considerations. You want to re-sticker your existing product, certainly you can do so and there is no objection on the part of FSSAI,”
the judge said during the hearing.
Dr Reddy’s Laboratories had moved the court challenging FSSAI’s October 14 order that withdrew all prior permissions allowing food and beverage companies to use the word “ORS” in their branding unless the product matched the WHO-recommended Oral Rehydration Solution formulation.
FSSAI had reasoned that many sugary or electrolyte drinks misleadingly used the “ORS” label, potentially confusing consumers — especially children — and violating the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The company manufactures Rebalanz VITORS, an oral rehydration drink that had been marketed under the “ORS” category. In its plea, it sought permission to dispose of the already manufactured stock, asserting that it had stopped production of new batches.
The court indicated that the company may “re-sticker” its existing stock to remove the “ORS” label and said there was no objection from the FSSAI in doing so.
“As far as existing stock is concerned, I will give you liberty to represent to them (FSSAI) and point out difficulties and see if any via media can be reached. I am not enforcing any via media which will compromise public health consideration; that is for FSSAI to consider,”
Justice Datta added.
Counsel for Dr Reddy’s submitted that the company was ready to re-sticker the products in its possession and even retrieve stocks from distributors for relabelling.
FSSAI’s counsel opposed any relaxation allowing the sale of the existing stock bearing the “Rebalanz VITORS” mark, stressing that misleading labelling could have harmful public health implications.
Justice Datta reiterated that “public health considerations are paramount” and said the court would not pass any order that undermines FSSAI’s regulatory intent. The bench also indicated that it will set a timeline for the regulator to consider and decide the company’s representation on the matter.
