Lack of adequate edible oils’ testing facilities ‘unfortunate’: Punjab and Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has described as “unfortunate” that the nearest laboratory equipped to conduct tests for adulteration is located approximately 1,500 km away in Nagpur despite large-scale consumption of edible oils across the country.

The bench instructed the Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain to ascertain the central government’s policy on laboratory facilities and clarify whether there were proposals to establish additional testing laboratories across the country. The court further sought explanations on the absence of such proposals if no plans existed.

Expressing concern over the lack of accessible testing facilities, the division bench Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal in its detailed order asked Jain “to find out what is the central government’s policy and whether there is proposal for opening other laboratories across the country, and if not then why”.

The direction came after Jain informed the bench that the nearest laboratory for the purpose was Central Agmark Laboratory at Nagpur. “This court will deal with this aspect at any subsequent hearing”, the court added. It also directed the Registrar-General to immediately send samples of mustard oil brands to Central Agmark Laboratory in Nagpur for “conducting the test for other miscible oil”.

Taking cognisance of a “large number of complaints” on blending of mustard oil with other oils, the bench had earlier directed the testing of three popular brands. In its directive aimed at curbing mustard oil adulteration, the bench had also directed the placing of the laboratory report before the court

The bench had asserted it would be appropriate that mustard oil testing of at least three different popular brands was undertaken from any of the central laboratories situated within the Union Territory of Chandigarh, or the state of Punjab or Haryana.

The bench also directed the high court Registrar-General to promptly purchase a litre each of three popular mustard oil brands out of the Chief Justice’s contingency fund. The registry was subsequently instructed to send 500 ml from each of the three brands to the regional ‘Agmark’ laboratory in Amritsar for testing.

“It appears that the instances of adverse action taken against the defaulters indulging in misbranding, adulteration or blending of mustard oil are perfunctory. Respondents do not appear to be either serious about taking action against the defaulters or the concerned legislation does not have enough teeth. Be that as it may, a large number of complaints are being received as regards blending of mustard oil with other oils, for instance, refined rice bran oil despite the process of blending having been prohibited under Rule 2.1 of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restrictions on Sales and Regulations, 2011,” the bench observed.