THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. versus THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, JOOHPUR THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL

Citation: [2011] 11 S.C.R. 808 · Decided: 11-10-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
(2011] 11 S.C.R. 808 
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. 
V. 
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, 
JOOHPUR THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL 
(Civil Appeal Nos.8523-24 of 2011) 
OCTOBER 11, 2011 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] 
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 -
s. 9 -
C Appointment of food inspectors - Power of - Held: Section 9 
vests power in the State Government to appoint such persons 
as it thinks fit, having the prescribed qualifications to be Food 
Inspectors for the local areas assigned to them, as prescribed 
ulr. 8 of the Rules - On facts with regard to manufacture and 
o sale of synthetic milk, the Chief Medical Officer initiated action 
of taking samples of the products and sending it for testing -
Thereafter, in a writ petition, the High Court issued a 
mandamus compefling the State Government to replace the 
Medical Officers by Sanitary Inspectors or other regular 
E recruits as Food Inspector which was not correct - State 
Government could appoint a medical officer in-charge of 
health administration of a local area as a Food Inspector - If 
the High Cowt found that the medical officers were not trained 
in food inspection and sampling work, it could also direct that 
F the medical officers be given the required training to function 
as Food Inspector- Thus, the direction by the High Court with 
regard to appointment of Food Inspectors against 34 posts 
which were lying vacant and appointment of Sanitary 
Inspectors as Food Inspectors in the meanwhile is set aside 
G - Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 - r. 8. 
In a suo motu writ petition entertained by the High 
Court with regard to manufacturing and sale of synthetic 
milk in certain Districts of the State, the Collectors of the 
District appeared on direction by the High Court. They 
H 
808 
. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. v. HIGH COURT OF 809 
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN 
filed their reply that the Chief Medical Health Officer A 
initiated action as regards taking samples of the product 
and sending it for testing. The High Court found that the 
Chief Medical Health Officers and Deputy Chief Medical 
Health Officers had been vested with the powers of Food 
Inspector, though they did not have the requisite training 
B 
to function as Food Inspectors; and that 34 posts of 
Food Inspectors were lying vacant. The High Court 
directed appointment of Food Inspectors against 34 posts 
and till regular appointment is made, Sanitary Inspectors 
and others who possess .the requisite qualifications may c 
be given appointment to the post of Food Inspector. 
Therefore, the appellant-State filed the instant appeals. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: Sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Prevention 
D 
of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 states that the Central 
Government or the State Government may, by notification 
in the official Gazette, appoint such persons as it thinks 
fit, having the prescribed qualifications to be Food 
Inspectors for such local areas as may be assigned to 
E 
them by the Central Government or the State 
Government, as the case may be. Rule 8 of the Prevention 
of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 prescribes the 
qualifications of Food Inspectors and it states in clause 
(a) that a medical officer in-charge of health administration 
F 
of local area is qualified for appointment as Food 
Inspector. In clauses (b) & (c) a graduate in medicine who 
has received at least one months' training in food 
inspection and sampling work and a graduate in Science 
with Chemistry as one of the subjects or a graduate in 
Agriculture or Public Health or Pharmacy of in Veterinary· G 
Science or a graduate in Food Technology or Dairy 
Technology or a Diploma Holder in Food Technology or 
Dairy Technology from a University or Institution 
H 
810 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 11 S.C.R. 
A established in India by law or having equivalent 
qualification and has received three months satisfactory 
training in food inspection and sampling work is also 
qualified to be a Food Inspector. The State. Government 
could therefore appoint a medical officer in-charge of 
B health administration of a local area as a Food Inspector. 
If the High Court found that the medical officers were not 
trained in food inspection and sampling work, it could 
also direct that the medical officers are given the required 
training to function as Food Inspector, but the High Court 
c could not have issued a mandamus compelling the State 
Government to replace 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.