Strict measures introduced in Maharashtra against the sale of expired and spoiled food
Read more
Aaj Tak
www.aajtak.in

Strict measures introduced in Maharashtra against the sale of expired and spoiled food

Maharashtra has adopted stringent measures following the discovery of cases involving the resale of food products with expired or spoiled dates. Commissioner of the Food and Drug Control Authority (FDA), Tukaram Mundhe, issued a new order requiring companies to provide irrefutable proof of the complete destruction of expired and unfit-for-consumption products. Simply presenting a paper certificate of destruction will no longer be considered sufficient.

FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe emphasized that the administration's goal is not only to conduct inspections but also to ensure strict adherence to established regulations. To guarantee the quality and safety of food products, the FDA has implemented 22 regulations covering areas such as the hotel industry, milk and dairy products, vegetable oil, products supplied to schools, and other food processing enterprises. These rules define the responsibilities for all participants in the food business, including traders, companies, license holders, distributors, and relevant officials.

Previously, reports surfaced of instances where, despite receiving a certificate of destruction for expired goods, they were not actually destroyed completely. In some cases, these goods were subsequently rerouted to the market through agents. Attempts to alter the expiration dates on food products were also reported.

As part of the fight against the resale of expired products, the FDA conducted large-scale inspections in the districts of Bhiwandi and Wadpe over the past fifteen days, confiscating food supplies from various locations. In Bhiwandi, initially, about 80 thousand rupees worth of goods were seized, and later, another 2.6 million rupees in stock was discovered. In the Wadpe area, licenses of food trade-related establishments were suspended following inspections at two sites. According to the FDA commissioner, approximately 50 million rupees worth of goods were seized during this entire campaign. Furthermore, two cases were registered after 10 inspections, naming owners as defendants.

According to the rules, expired and spoiled products must be stored separately from marketable goods. However, inspections revealed that appropriate separation measures were absent in some locations. Although companies involved in product destruction provide certificates, this alone is insufficient proof of actual destruction. Tukaram Mundhe stated that preparation for this campaign took place over the last two months, during which a thorough analysis of storage methods for expired goods, returned products, and ways they could re-enter the market was conducted. Subsequently, new directives were developed to ensure strict compliance with food safety standards.

The FDA Commissioner clearly stated that if an expired product enters the market, the responsibility does not lie solely with the seller. The manufacturing company, distributor, wholesaler, license holder, and everyone involved in the food supply chain must fulfill their duties. Tukaram Mundhe stressed that every company, regardless of its size, must ensure that expired and spoiled products do not reach the market for further sale. He sent a clear signal that not a single package of expired product should enter the market.

The FDA asserts that the main objective of the new directives is to ensure the public has safe and quality food. Companies and individuals violating the rules will be held accountable according to the law. The process of destroying expired and spoiled products will now be under close scrutiny, and companies will be required to provide not only documentary confirmation but also convincing evidence of the actual destruction of the goods.

Tukaram Mundhe also noted that the Food Control Department's actions against counterfeit vegetable oil are ongoing and will continue. He emphasized that it is currently the Diwali festival period, accompanied by special culinary traditions, making it crucial to use clean and high-quality oils for cooking. A campaign against adulterated oil is being conducted to protect people's health. Mundhe reported that 1089 inspections concerning vegetable oil have been carried out so far, resulting in the cancellation of 80 licenses and the seizure of 28,753 centners of goods. He confirmed that the campaign against fake oil will continue.

Similar stories

How animal welfare and human rights affect food security
Read more
foodformzansi.co.za

How animal welfare and human rights affect food security

On World Food Security Day, lawyer Dr. Tarryn Bannister explains how issues of animal welfare and human rights are transforming the future of food security in South Africa. When major South African retail chains ignored the hearings of the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) investigating the right to food, they may have saved management time, but risked far more valuable assets: consumer trust, constitutional legitimacy, and sustainability.

Their absence also highlighted a gap in how corporations assess risks to people, animals, and the environment. The SAHRC's national inquiry into South Africa's food systems examines everyone's right to access adequate food, enshrined in Section 27(1)(b) of the Constitution. This is crucial because over 1,000 children die from malnutrition annually, and 28.8% of children under five suffer from stunting, despite the country's abundance of food resources. Poverty and inequality exacerbate the situation: the Pietermaritzburg Economic Justice & Dignity group found that a basic nutritional basket for a low-income household costs more than R1,000 per month than families can afford.

These problems are interconnected. The same food systems that prevent families from affording adequate nutrition can subject workers to poor working conditions, harm the environment, and cause extreme suffering to animals. As a recent analysis of the Daybreak Foods case shows, the exploitation of people and animals can stem from the same failures in governance, accountability, and supply chains.

This World Food Security Day (October 16) is an opportune moment to question why corporate risk models still treat people, animals, and the environment as separate aspects. Corporate decisions determine whether people can realize their constitutional rights to adequate food (Section 27) and children's right to basic nutrition (Section 28). The Constitutional Court linked animal welfare to environmental law under Section 24, recognizing animals as sentient beings with intrinsic value. Since Section 8(2) of the Constitution applies to private companies where applicable, food producers and sellers cannot consider animal welfare outside constitutional control.

When suppliers keep poultry in cruel cages or gas-stun pigs, companies must properly account for the associated harms and risks. Public safety is also at risk: industrial farming was linked to a listeriosis outbreak in 2017 that affected over 820 people and resulted in 218 deaths.

These consequences are not merely ethical issues; they enter the governance system that imposes obligations and potential liability on corporations. Directors' duties under the Companies Act 71 of 2008 to act honestly, with due care, skill, and diligence increasingly include ESG considerations. King IV expects boards of directors to integrate responsible corporate citizenship into strategy and view risk as an integral part of strategic decision-making.

The Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 requires honest and transparent marketing and disclosure, yet, as highlighted in the ALRSA report 'Scrambling for the Truth', consumers are regularly denied clear information about how their food is produced, undermining their ability to make informed choices. The environmental base is also increasingly recognizing 'animal welfare,' and organizations are advocating for stronger reforms, such as the Animal Law Project Manifesto, which calls for the recognition of animal sentience, corporate responsibility, and transparency.

SAHRC, the independent Chapter 9 institution mandated to promote, protect, investigate, and monitor human rights, held its first phase of hearings in March 2026 and the second in July. Organizations, including ALRSA, submitted written and oral submissions during the first phase. However, many of the largest retail chains were absent from the second phase despite being invited. Only Shoprite provided written responses; Massmart requested a postponement, and others did not participate. Their absence underscores the limitations of relying on voluntary participation. The Commission invited participants rather than summoning them by subpoena, prompting civil society to call on SAHRC to subpoena retailers so they could answer questions under oath.

In 2018, Momentum refused to pay a R2.4 million insurance claim to Deniz Ganas after her husband, Nathan, was shot during a robbery, citing his undisclosed high blood sugar. The Ombudsman supported the insurer, but public anger exposed the gap between legal compliance and public expectations of justice. Ultimately, Momentum made a voluntary payment and introduced compensation for victims of violent crime.

Amid growing debates on corporate governance and scrutiny of corporate behavior, the biggest risks may not lie in legislation or contracts, but in the failure to recognize that every corporate decision shapes relationships of public trust, dependency, and vulnerability. Just as Momentum realized that legal correctness was insufficient, food companies are learning that ignoring people, animals, and the environment is not a low-risk action. In 2020, the Advertising Regulatory Board ruled on appeal that Fair Cape Dairies could not use the terms 'humane' and '#HappyCows' in its advertising, leading to tangible reputational and commercial consequences.

Nevertheless, many corporations still view these risks as an isolated exercise in formal compliance, detached from their reputational, financial, and legal consequences. However, consumers care: 84% of South Africans expect food companies to ensure animal welfare. Investors feel the same way: the FAIRR initiative, a network of over 400 investors representing assets worth over $95 trillion, views intensive livestock farming risks as significant.

The hearings represented a missed opportunity for many food companies to demonstrate their social responsibility efforts and shape their relationship with SAHRC and the public. Notably, when asked if they would support a proposed voluntary food right charter with measurable, SAHRC-monitored commitments, Tiger Brands stated it would 'gladly accept the opportunity to participate' in developing the charter and 'offer support' through its involvement in the food system.

Retailers who skipped the hearings apparently misjudged their risks regarding reputation, access to capital, and constitutional legitimacy. While accountability mechanisms need strengthening, companies wishing to stay ahead of trends must recognize that accountability encompasses social legitimacy, constitutional values, and capital, not just literal adherence to rules. On this World Food Security Day and going forward, corporations must pay attention to how harm to people, animals, and the environment constitutes interconnected corporate risks that must be taken seriously.

Popular