Sago manufacturer challenged sealing of premises and suspension-related food safety order. The court found the petitioner had already filed an appeal listed for hearing and dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:MHC:1346
W.P.No.6633 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.03.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.No.6633 of 2024
and
W.M.P.Nos. 7359 & 7361 of 2024
New Bharathavel Sago Factory rep. by its Proprietor Ganesan, Sitheri Post, Thalaivasal Taluk, Salem District.
.. Petitioner
vs
1.Commissioner of Food Safety, No.359, Anna Salai, V Floor, DMS Office Building, DMS Campus, Teynampet, Chennai- 600 006.
3.Designated Officer, Food Safety and Drug Administration, Salem District, Salem – 1.
4.Managing Director, SAGO SERVE Jagirammapalayam, Omalur Main Road, Salem – 636 302
.. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire
W.P.No.6633 of 2024
records relating to the Order in R.No.466/2024/A1/FSD dated 14.02.2024 on the file of the 3rd respondent herein and quash the same and consequently restrain the respondents herein from coercing the petitioner herein to send his entire production of Sago / Starch to the 4th respondent marketing Society and taking sample in the intermediate products viz., Wet Tapioca Starch / liquid Tapioca Starch and on that score suspending the Food manufacturer license by abusing the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Rajasekaran
For Respondents : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan (for R1 to R3) Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
The petitioner has challenged an order passed by the 3rd
respondent/the Designated Officer, Food Safety and Drug Administration, Salem and seeks a quash of the same with several consequential prayers. The petitioner is aggrieved by the sealing of its premises in Salem District and has set out various grievances in regard to the sealing per se, as well as the conduct of the officers in the course of the search.
2.However, Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan, learned Additional Government Pleader, who accepts notice for R1 to R3 would point out
that the petitioner has made an appeal challenging impugned order dated
2/4
W.P.No.6633 of 2024
14.03.2024
Index:Yes/No Speaking Order Neutral Citation:Yes vs
To
3/4
W.P.No.6633 of 2024
DR. ANITA SUMANTH,J.
vs
W.P.No.6633 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos. 7359 & 7361 of 2024
14.03.2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the Designated Officer's order is maintainable when an appeal against the same order is pending before the appellate authority.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
New Bharathavel Sago Factory rep. by its Proprietor Ganesan
Commissioner of Food Safety
District Collector, Salem District
Designated Officer, Food Safety and Drug Administration, Salem District
Managing Director, SAGO SERVE
Anita Sumanth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
