Food recall stayed pending writ review, while affected batch remains barred from human consumption.

The appellant challenged a notice dated 9 September 2026, issued on the basis of a food-analysis report dated 19 August 2026 that classified a sample of its “Anik Ghee” as unsafe after black particles were observed.

The appellant argued that the finding did not establish a risk to consumption and that the notice required recall of the product without first prohibiting its sale.

The Single Judge issued notice in the writ petition but did not grant interim relief.

The appellant appealed, seeking to stay the notice and prevent coercive action pending the writ petition.

1. Whether the Single Judge’s refusal of interim relief warranted appellate intervention pending determination of the writ petition.

2. Whether the impugned notice requiring recall of the specified batch should be stayed, and, if so, on what terms.

The dispute arose under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, including Section 3(1)(zz)(xi), concerning the classification of unsafe food, and Section 28, concerning withdrawal or recall of unsafe food; the State also relied on Regulation 2.1.8 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011.

The appellant relied on FSSAI’s communication dated 18 June 2024 regarding the sequence of prohibiting sale and ordering recall.

The Division Bench did not finally interpret or apply these provisions to determine whether the product was unsafe; it left those merits for the writ petition and granted interim relief while restricting the batch from being sold or made available for human consumption.

The Court noted that the writ petition remained pending and that the Single Judge had issued notice, leaving the substantive issues open for determination there.

It considered that the appellant’s grounds—including the significance of the reported extraneous matter and the authority and procedure for ordering recall—required examination on the merits.

At the same time, recalling the entire batch at that stage could cause reputational and logistical harm.

Balancing that concern against the public-health issue, the Court stayed the notice but barred sale or other availability of the specified batch for human consumption pending the writ petition.

The operation of the notice dated 9 September 2026 was stayed until final disposal of the writ petition, subject to the direction that the specified batch must not be sold or otherwise made available for human consumption.

All issues raised in the writ petition were left open.