The Delhi High Court said today that it had admitted a plea by the students of Father Agnel School, a national chain of convent schools, asking to be heard out before passing any order in on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the ban.
The PIL was originally filed by a Delhi-based non-governmental organisation, Uday Foundation, a year ago where it asked for the sale of junk food and aerated drinks to be outlawed in schools as well as within a 500-metre radius.
Though the court has already recommended to the Indian government that it ban the sale of these foods in school, it is yet to pass any order on the vicinity of schools.
A spokesperson for Father Agnel School confirmed to FoodNavigator-Asia that it has asked to be made party to the plea in order to ensure that junk foods and beverages are banned from schools and from their immediate neighbourhoods.
“We also want food companies not to use tactics and promotions such as giving gifts and toys and to clearly and mandatorily label the harmful ingredients in junk foods, wherever they maybe sold,” he added.
The Delhi High Court meanwhile has referred the case to the Indian government and it is widely believed that with schools entering the fray, the possibility of junk foods being banned near schools is more concrete than before.
But groups like the All India Food Processors Association (AIFPA) oppose the PIL.
In its own court plea, the AIFPA said the PIL was flawed as the petitioner had failed to clarify the kind of foods that be banned in the vicinity of schools. It argued that sincethere were no foods defined as junk foods under the Prevention of Food Adulteration act, there was no basis for banning any products.
Instead, the AIFPA said, the petition should consider that the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India (FSSAI) is currently drafting guidelines regarding the quality and safety of food in schools.
The FSSAI assumed control of all food safety issues in the country on August 5, when the Food Safety Act of 2006 came in to force, replacing the Prevention of Food Adulteration act of 1954.
As such, AIFPA said, the court should wait for the FSSAI process, which involves the body talking to scientific panels as well as other agencies, and not interfere at this stage by passing an order.