Why in News?

• The Maharashtra Government has approached the Bombay High Court against the Union Health Ministry and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
• The State government alleges that the central regulator has created a parallel food-safety enforcement mechanism that encroaches upon the statutory powers of State authorities.
• The petition, filed through Maharashtra’s Food Safety Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe, challenges the manner in which centrally licensed food businesses are regulated and inspected.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Core Issue - Centralisation vs Decentralisation
• Major Point of Contention
• Licensing Thresholds and FoSCoS
• FSSAI and its Role
• FSSAI–State Relationship and Relief Sought by State
• Significance for Governance and Federalism

Core Issue - Centralisation vs Decentralisation:

• The dispute centres on the interpretation and implementation of the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSS Act), 2006.
• Maharashtra argues that the legislation was intended to decentralise food-safety administration, with implementation primarily involving -
  • State Commissioners of Food Safety;
  • Designated Officers and Food Safety Officers;
  • Food Analysts; and
  • Panchayati Raj Institutions and Urban Local Bodies.
• According to the State, subsequent orders and regulations have gradually shifted enforcement towards FSSAI and its central officials, weakening the role of State authorities.

Major Point of Contention:

• Maharashtra alleges that the FSSAI order (dated May 12, 2023) restricted State Food Safety Commissioners and their officers from independently enforcing the FSS Act in establishments holding a Central Licence.
• The State claims that FSSAI subsequently created or deployed positions such as Central Licensing Authorities, Central Food Safety Officers and Central Food Analysts, thereby establishing a parallel enforcement structure.
• The petition argues that such arrangements effectively “usurp” the powers of State Commissioners of Food Safety.
• However, FSSAI's own enforcement framework recognises both central and state structures.
• Therefore, the precise division of enforcement jurisdiction is a key legal issue before the Court.

Licensing Thresholds and FoSCoS:

• Maharashtra has also challenged FSSAI's revision of the turnover thresholds determining whether a food business requires a State Licence or a Central Licence.
• Under the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Amendment Regulations, 2026, the revised thresholds are -
  • Registration: Turnover up to ₹1.5 crore
  • State licence: Above ₹1.5 crore and up to ₹50 crore
  • Central licence: Above ₹50 crore
• These revised thresholds became applicable from April 1, 2026 for new applications, with migration arrangements for existing businesses.
• FSSAI states that the amendments did not change the jurisdiction of licensing authorities.
• Maharashtra, however, alleges that the changes were introduced without adequate prior public consultation and has challenged the relevant regulatory provisions.
• The State has also questioned the mandatory use of the Food Safety Compliance System (FoSCoS).
• It argued that centralised digital licensing and databases could weaken the ability of State authorities to independently monitor and inspect food businesses.

FSSAI and its Role:

• The FSSAI is India's apex statutory food-safety regulator established under the FSS Act, 2006.
• Key functions of FSSAI:
  • Lays down science-based standards for food articles.
  • Regulates the manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import of food.
  • Provides a unified legal framework for food safety by replacing multiple earlier food-related laws.
  • Regulates licensing and registration of Food Business Operators (FBOs).
  • Coordinates food-safety enforcement with State and Union Territory authorities.
  • Prescribes standards for food testing and facilitates a network of food laboratories.
  • Undertakes risk assessment, surveillance and food-safety monitoring.
  • Regulates imported food articles at ports of entry.
  • Promotes food-safety awareness and capacity building.
• Every FBO is required to obtain the applicable FSSAI registration or licence under Section 31 of the FSS Act.

FSSAI-State Relationship and Relief Sought by State:

• Enforcement structure:
  • The FSS Act envisages that State enforcement is carried out through the Commissioner of Food Safety, Designated Officers, Food Safety Officers, Food Analysts and local bodies.
  • FSSAI exercises its statutory functions at the national level.
  • Thus, the present dispute is essentially about where the line between central standard-setting/licensing and State-level enforcement should be drawn.
• Maharashtra's main grievances: The State has argued that -
  • FSSAI has progressively centralised food-safety enforcement.
  • State officers have been restricted from inspecting centrally licensed establishments.
  • Creation of central enforcement posts allegedly goes beyond the statutory framework.
  • Revised licensing thresholds were allegedly introduced without adequate public consultation.
  • FoSCoS may result in excessive central control over food-business databases and licensing.
• Relief sought: Maharashtra has sought -
  • Quashing of the challenged provisions of the 2011 Licensing and Registration Regulations, 2018 Recruitment Regulations and 2026 Amendment Regulations;
  • An interim stay on the May 2023 order;
  • Restoration of State authorities' inspection powers over centrally licensed businesses; and
  • Transfer of relevant FoSCoS database records back to State authorities.

Conclusion:

• The case raises broader questions of cooperative federalism, administrative decentralisation and regulatory federalism.
• Food safety requires uniform national standards because food supply chains frequently cross State boundaries.
• At the same time, enforcement often depends on local knowledge, field inspections and State administrative machinery. The challenge, therefore, is to maintain a balance.