PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION ACT, 1954

The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 aims at making provisions for the
prevention of adulteration of food. The act extends to the whole of India and came into
force on 1 June 1955.
What Is Adulterated Food?
An article of food shall be deemed to be adulterated
1. if the article sold by a vendor is not of the nature, substance or quality demanded
by the purchaser, or which it purports to be;
2. if the article contains any substance affecting its quality, or if it is so processed as
to injuriously affect its nature, substance or quality;
3. if any inferior or cheaper substance has been substituted wholly or partly for the
article, or any constituent of the article has been wholly or partly abstracted from
it, so as to affect its quality, or if it is so processed as to injuriously affect its
nature, substance or quality;
4. if the article had been prepared, packed or kept under unsanitary conditions
whereby it has become contaminated or injurious to health;
5. if the article consists wholly or in part of any filthy, putrid, disgusting, rotten,
decomposed or diseased animal or vegetable substance, or being insect-infested,
or otherwise, is unfit for human consumption;
6. if the article is obtained from a diseased animal;
7. if the article contains any poisonous or other ingredient which is injurious to
health;
8. if the container of the article is composed of any poisonous or deleterious
substance which renders its contents injurious to health;
9. if the article contains any prohibited colouring matter or preservative, or any
permitted colouring matter or preservative in excess of the prescribed limits; and
10. if the quality or purity of the article falls below the prescribed standard, or its
constituents are present in proportions other than those prescribed, whether or not
rendering it injurious to health.
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS UNDER COPRA

The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has provided for some institutional arrangements to
protect and promote consumer rights and to redress their grievances. The institutional
arrangements are discussed here.
Consumer Protection Councils
The act envisages the establishment of Consumer Protection Councils at the national and
state levels.
The council is basically advisory in nature. The Central Council will be constituted with
the following members:

1. the Union Minister in charge of the Department of Food and Civil Supplies will
be the chairman of the council; and
2. members not exceeding 150 in number consisting of officials drawn from various
Union Ministries, Members of Parliament, consumer organizations, concerned
autonomous bodies, representatives of women, farmers, trade and industry, and
persons representing consumer interests.
The member-secretary of the council will be the Secretary in charge of Consumer Affairs
in the Central Government. It is required under the Act to meet at least once in a year.
The council, within its members, will constitute working groups to perform assigned
functions and report the same to the council for deliberations.
State Consumer Protection Councils The State Consumer Protection Council will be
established in each state by the respective State governments. The objects of the State
Council are the same as those of the Central Council, namely, to promote and protect
within the state, the rights of consumers as laid down under the Consumer Protection Act.
The council consists of official and non-official members representing consumer interest,
as may be nominated or appointed by the State government. The State Council shall meet
as and when necessary, but not less than two meetings shall be held every year.
Three-tier Consumer Dispute Redressal System
Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act provides for the establishment of a three-tier
system for the redressal of consumer disputes at the district, state and national levels in
the ascending order of hierarchy. The objective of the system is to provide cheap and
quick redressal of consumer grievances at the appropriate level with minimum
technicalities and legal formalities. The act stipulates that a complaint relating to any
goods sold or delivered (or agreed to be sold or delivered), or any service provided (or
agreed to be provided) can be filed with the appropriate forum. The complaint can be
filed by an individual consumer, a recognized association of consumers or by a State or
Central Government (even if the government itself may not be an aggrieved party). There
is also a provision under the Act, for a class action complaint in which one or more
consumers can file a complaint on behalf of all interested or involved consumers.
However, such a class action complaint can be filed only with the consent of the
concerned District Forum.
There are at present 555 District Fora, 32 State Commissions one in each state and union
territory, apart from the National Commission. Some of these bodies instituted for the
redressal of consumer grievances under the Consumer Protection Act are discussed here.
District Forums
Composition: The district-level Consumer Redressal Forum is the foundation of the
hierarchical structure envisaged by the Act. The forum would consist of three persons,
appointed by the State government on the recommendations of a committee comprising
(i) the president of the State Commission who will act as Chairman of the selection

committee; (ii) Secretary, Law Department of the state; and (iii) Secretary-in-Charge of
the Department of Consumer Affairs of the state concerned.
Qualifications of members: (i) The president of the District Forum should be a person
who has been, or qualified to be, a District Judge; (ii) A person of eminence in the field of
education, trade or commerce; or (iii) a lady social worker. Apart from the president, the
other two members should have adequate knowledge of law, commerce, accountancy,
industry, public affairs and administration.
Term of office: The term of office of each member of the District Forum is five years or
up to the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. Members are not eligible for
reappointment.
Remuneration: The service conditions and monetary compensation for the members of
the District Forum will be prescribed by the State government.
Jurisdiction of the district forum: As per the act, the forum shall have the jurisdiction to
arbiter cases of complaints where the value of goods or services and the claimed
compensation do not exceed INR 5,00,000. The matter of complaint should fall within
the local limits assigned to the forum, ie., the geographic limit of a district. Box 3.3 is a
summarized version of the order of the District Forum, Chennai (South) and provides a
gist of the case and the order passed by the Consumer Court. Besides, a complaint shall
be instituted in the forum within the limits of whose jurisdiction the opposite party or
each of the opposite parties actually resides or carries on business at the time of filing the
complaint; or any of the opposite parties actually resides or carries on business at the time
of filing the complaint, provided that in such a case, the permission of the District Forum
is given or the opposite parties who do not reside within the limits have no objection, or
the cause of action, wholly or in part, in the proceseeds arise therefrom.
Procedure for filing complaints: Under the Consumer Protection Act, a complaint in
relation to any goods sold or delivered or any service provided may be filed with the
District Forum by (i) the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or to whom
such service is provided; (ii) any recognized consumer association, whether the aggrieved
consumer is a member or not; (iii) one or more consumers where there are several
consumers, united in common interest; and (iv) the Central or the State Government.
Procedure for settling disputes: If the dispute arises out of product defect, the forum may
send the product for testing and analysis by a government-approved laboratory and on the
basis of the result of the test, the case is decided. When no such test is required, the case
is decided on the merits of available evidence.
Powers of the forum: Under the act, the District Forum is vested with the same powers
as of a civil court. Additionally, it has the powers to order any person to produce related
documents or products in his or her custody, furnish any information that may be required
for the settlement of the dispute or authorize any officer to search any premise and seize
concerned documents and goods which are likely to be destroyed, altered or secreted.

BOX 3.3 ORDER OF THE DISTRICT FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

The complainant, Fr. Arokiasamy Arul, studied at Notre Dame University, Indiana, USA,
during 199497. He purchased an air ticket from Air India at Chicago for his journey to
Bangalore. The complainant stated that he boarded on 9 September 1997 Flight TWA 730
at OHare Airport, Chicago while his two baggages were checked in through the cargo
section, and that he was allowed to carry one small Targus bag containing a laptop
computer, one small tape recorder and other small things, and another personal bag inside
the aircraft. The complainant embarked at JFK New York airport for Amman at about
8.15 a.m. However, the FLT 2262 left the airport belatedly at 2.00 a.m. on 10 September
1997. The complainant was about to emplane the Flight 2262, but was stopped by one of
the officials of the Royal Jordanian Airlines (which carried Air Indias passengers for
onward journey) who objected to the complainant carrying the Targus bag with him into
the aircraft and told him that the same should be handed over to him for being sent to the
cargo section in the aircraft. In spite of protest, the official took away the Targus bag. At
Amman, the complainant along with other passengers had to take Air India and arrived at
Mumbai on 11 September 1997. When the baggage was cleared, he found that while his
two baggages were intact the Targus bag was found to be ripped open and the laptop
computer and the tape recorder were missing. Since the respondent airlines failed to make
good the loss, the above case was filed claiming compensation of INR 90,300 with
interest as damage INR 100,000 with interest as compensation for mental agony, and a
sum of INR 20,000 towards costs.
The airlines contended that the forum had no territorial jurisdiction and that in any event
the Royal Jordanian Airlines was liable to pay US$ 400 which is the maximum
compensation as per the carriers liabilities under the Warsaw Convention.
The District Forum held in its order dated 28 March 2005 that since the airlines were
having offices and working in Chennai, there was a territorial jurisdiction for the forum
to entertain the complaint. As the baggage was handled by the Royal Jordanian Airlines at
the airport on behalf of Air India, both the Airlines are jointly and severally liable, as it is
not known where and when the baggage was ripped open and the items taken. Therefore,
the forum held that they had committed deficiency in service and were directed to pay a
sum of INR 84,000 with interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from 11 September
1997 onwards; a sum of INR 5,000 towards the deficiency in service; and a sum of INR
1,000 as costs within a period of two months.

Courtesy: Advocate S. Mahimai Raj, Chennai.

Moreover, the proceedings of the forum with regard to its decision on the basis of
available evidence cannot be questioned in any court of law on the ground that the
principle of natural justice was not followed. With the District Forum, oral submissions
of the respondent (or opposite) party are acceptable.

Remedial action: In case the complainant has been proved to have a legitimate grievance,
the District Forum may, by way of relief or compensation to him or her, order the
opposite party to (i) remove the defect or deficiency from the good or service; (ii) replace
the good with a new one which is free from the defect; (iii) refund to the complainant the
prices or charges received from the consumer; (iv) pay a compensation to the consumer
for loss, cost of injury or damage suffered by him or her; (v) cease and desist from the
restrictive or unfair trade practice; or (vi) withdraw the supply of the hazardous or
defective good from the market. If necessary, the District Forum can order one or more of
the above types of actions.
There have been many instances where the District Forums have ordered immediate
compensation to the consumer for mental harassment and agony suffered from the action
of the producer or supplier. In cases of government officials such as Revenue Officers,
Railways and Road Transport Corporations or Electricity or Water and Sewerage Boards,
the forums have ordered compensations to be paid out of public funds to the aggrieved
complainants, but to be recovered subsequently from the officials responsible for causing
the agony or mental harassment.
Dismissal of frivolous or vexatious complaints: Where a complaint instituted before any
redressal agency is found to be frivolous or vexatious, the redressal agency shall dismiss
the complaint and make an order that the complainant shall pay to the opposite party such
cost not exceeding INR 10,000 as may be specified in the order.
Appeals against forums orders: Appeal against the order of the District Forum can be
filed with the State Commission within 30 days of passing the order. In such cases, with a
view to cutting down delay in ensuring speedy consumer justice, no further appeal
against the order of the State Commission that heard the appeal is permitted.
State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission This state-wise consumer dispute
redressal body, popularly known as State Commission is established in each State/Union
territory under the Consumer Protection Act.
State Commission is the apex body in the State and its orders are binding on all the
District Forums in the State.
Organization and structure: The State Commission has, as its chief officer, a president,
who is appointed by the State Government on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of
the High Court. The President of the Commission is one who is or has been the Judge of
a High Court. Two other members, of whom one is a woman constitute the commission.
They too are the appointees of the State Government. The members have to be persons of
ability, integrity and standing with adequate knowledge and experience in such areas as
economics, law, commerce, industry and administration.
Compensation: The terms and conditions of service including remuneration, allowance,
and perks of the members are determined by the State Government.

Terms of office of members of the commission: The term of office of each member is
five years or till the attainment of the age of 67 years (whichever is earlier) and he or she
shall not be eligible for reappointment, as in the case of District Forums.
Jurisdiction of the commission: The jurisdiction of the commission has three
dimensions. In its monetary jurisdiction, it could entertain complaints up to INR 1 million
involving compensation exceeding INR 5,00,000, but less than INR 2 million. In its
appellate jurisdiction, it can entertain appeals against the orders of a District Forum in the
State. In its supervisory jurisdiction, it can take a case pending at a District Forum in its
own hands in rare cases, if the State Government is of the view that the forum is
exceeding its jurisdiction or committing material irregularity in the case.
Procedures and dispute resolution: The rules, procedures and manner of disposal of a
complaint by a State Commission are similar to those of a District Forum.
Appeals: Appeals against the orders of the commission (except on appeals against the
orders of a District Forum) can be filed in the National Commission within 30 days of the
order.
Administrative control: The State Commission has administrative control over the
District Forums through (i) calling of periodic returns on cases dealt by them; (ii)
issuance of instructions on procedural matters; and (iii) supervision of the functioning of
the forums to ensure that the provisions of the Act are appropriately observed by the
District Forums (Box 3.4).
National Commission The Consumer Protection Act 1986 envisaged the setting up of
the National Commission as an apex body in consumer dispute settlement. Accordingly,
the Central Government has established the National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum at the national level.
Composition: The commission has a president and four members, one of whom is a
woman. The President is appointed by the central government on the recommendations of
the Chief Justice of India. The Central Government appoints the other four members on
the recommendations of a selection committee consisting of (i) a judge of the Supreme
Court nominated by the Chief Justice of India, who acts as chairman of the selection
committee; (ii) Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India; and (iii)
Secretary of the Department dealing with consumer affairs in the Government of India.
The members of the National Commission are selected on the basis of their ability,
integrity and standing and should have good knowledge and experience in the areas of
economics, commerce, accountancy, industry and public administration.
BOX 3.4 STATE COMMISSION CONFIRMS DISTRICT FORUMS ORDER

Chennai, June 30: The BSNL is at the receiving end for unnecessarily harassing a
subscriber saying that his cheque for a telephone bill had been dishonoured while the fact
being that the subscriber had made the payment by cash through the post office.

The eight-year long legal battle between the subscriber and the BSNL came to an end in
June 2006 with the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC)
dismissing an appeal by the BSNL and ordering it to pay INR 10,000 compensation for
the ordeal caused to the subscriber, B. Ravi Shankar of Lampert Nagar in Chennai.
This is wholly unpardonable It is a concrete case where the subscriber had made
proper payment before the due date, obtained a receipt and still the BSNL chose to harass
him, SCDRC president Justice K. Sampath and member Pon Gunasekaran observed
while passing orders in the case.
According to the complainant, he was summoned by the BSNL Accounts Department in
August 1998 and told that a cheque for INR 1,069 given by him towards the bill for May
1998 had been dishonoured while the fact was that he had made the payment, that too by
cash, three months earlier through a post office in K. K. Nagar. As the complainant was
away, his father N. Balasundaram, an elderly man, went to the BSNL office and met
Sridhar, the then senior accounts officer (South West division) and showed him the
payment receipt. But Sridhar had flatly refused to accept it stating that the receipt did not
have details whether the payment was really made in cash. The official went on directing
the complainants father to obtain a payment certificate from the post office on the same
day, otherwise the telephone line would be disconnected. Left with no other option,
Balasundaram went to the K. K. Nagar post office where he was told that such a
certificate could not be issued. That being so, the BSNL maintained the amount as
outstanding in the next month bill and also sent another message asking him to pay the
amount. Unable to bear the harassment any more, the complainant moved the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai (South), which, in December 2001,
directed the BSNL to pay a compensation of INR 10,000 for deficiency in service. In
defence, the BSNL argued that the complainants telephone number also figured in the
list of numbers of cheque return cases and that was why, as a routine, the department
wanted to confirm the same from him. Since it was confirmed that he made the payment
by cash, his line was not disconnected and hence there was no deficiency in service on its
part, the BSNL argued.
On perusal of the case, the SCDRC observed: Right from the beginning the department
is at fault. It cannot be justified that the BSNL, which was duty-bound to seek
clarification from the postal department for the discrepancy, made the complainant and
his father run from pillar to post. This is a case where no appeal should have been
preferred.

Source: BSNL Pulled Up for Harassing Subscriber, New Indian Express, Chennai
Edition, 1 July 2006. Reproduced with permission.
Terms of office of members: The term of office of a member is five years or till the age
of 70 years, whichever is earlier.

Service conditions: The remuneration, allowances and other service conditions of the
members of the National Commission are decided by the Central Government.
Jurisdiction: The monetary jurisdiction of the National Commission is above INR 10
million. Its appellate jurisdiction includes all appeals against the order of the State
Commission (Box 3.5). In its revisional or supervisory jurisdiction, it can call for records
and pass orders in the case of a consumer dispute which is pending before a State
Commission or has been decided by it, if it is found that it has failed to exercise its
jurisdiction, or has exercised it illegally or with material irregularity.
Manner of disposal of complaints: The manner of disposal of a complaint is the same as
that of a District Forum. The nature of powers of the National Commission is the same as
that of a District Forum. It is obligatory for the parties involved (or their agents) to appear
in person before the National Commission.
Administrative controls: The Commission possesses and exercises administrative control
over the State Commissions to ensure that the provisions of the act are suitably observed.
BOX 3.5 NATIONAL COMMISSION RESTORES STATE COMMISSIONS ORDER

The complainant, Mohb Ayub presented a cheque on 25 November 1989 for US$ 1400.92
issued by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabian General Organization for Social Insurance in his
favour to the Manager, Central Bank of India. The validity period was six months.
However, the cheque was misplaced by the bank, but was making efforts for getting the
amount credited to his account. It was learnt later on that there was an order to stop
payment from the originator on 26 May 1990. As the amount was not paid to him the
complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum. After hearing the parties, the
forum found that even after a long period, the cheque amount was not credited by the
bank to the complainants account and hence, the contention of the bank that there was a
stop order payment, that was given after a long time, cannot be accepted for nonpayment. Hence, the bank was directed to pay the complainant the amount in Indian
currency equivalent to US $1400.92 within one month failing which, to pay with interest
at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.
Aggrieved against that order, the bank preferred the appeal. After hearing the appeal, the
State Commission set aside the order of the District Forum on the ground that the
complainant was not entitled to receive any payment as the originator of the cheque had
stopped its payment.
Aggrieved against the order of the State Commission, the complainant preferred the
appeal to the National Commission.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi restored the order
of the District Forum and passed the following order.

It is clearly proved through the records that the Bank has lost the cheque and could not
trace it for a long time. The stop order was given by the originator six months after the
presentation of the cheque and hence, the Bank cannot be allowed to take refuge under
the originators stop payment order. There was clear negligence and deficiency on the
part of the Bank in not clearing the cheque within six months validity period and
consequently the order of the State Commission was set aside and the order of the
District Forum was restored and confirmed. Further, the National Commission awarded a
cost of INR 10,000.

Courtesy: Advocate S. Mahimai Raj, Chennai.

Appeals: Appeals against the orders of the National Commission can be filed in the
Supreme Court within 30 days of its orders.
At all levels of the three-tier consumer dispute redressal system, orders are considered
final if no appeal is made against them. These orders are enforceable in the same manner
as those of a Civil Court. These orders can be lawfully sent to the Civil Courts for
execution in those territories over which they have the jurisdiction. In case the person
against whom the case has been decided does not comply with the court order, he/she can
be punished with imprisonment ranging from one month to three years, or fine or both.
The complainant, in case he wins the case, is awarded the cost; while if he/she is found to
have taken advantage of the opposite party by filing a frivolous and vexatious complaint,
he/she can be fined up to INR 10,000, apart from petting his/her case dismissed.24
Monitoring authority: The Department of Consumer Affairs under the Ministry of
Consumer Affairs, Food, and Public Distribution monitors the disposal of cases by
consumer courts through the National Commission.