Court to FSSAI: four weeks, not four years
The Supreme Court wasn’t buying FSSAI’s dithering on front‑of‑pack nutrition rules back in February. It told the food regulator to come back in four weeks. We’re still waiting for Delhi to decide if the packet should say what’s in it.
The court directed the food regulator to return with its response within four weeks.
Content type: news
The Supreme Court has already put on record that it is unimpressed with the Centre’s slow walk on front‑of‑pack nutrition labelling. On 10 February 2026, in a petition by 3S and Our Health Society seeking clear warnings on sugar, salt and saturated fat, the bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan said FSSAI’s compliance affidavit “has not satisfied” it and that the exercise so far had not “yielded any positive or good result,” according to the Court’s order.
FSSAI told the Court it floated a draft Indian Nutrition Rating in 2022 — a 0.5 to 5‑star score — got over 14,000 comments, set up an expert panel in 2023, and then deferred the matter again at its 24 November 2025 meeting. It now wants more research, more mapping, more consultations. The Court, noting the petitioner’s push for plain warnings on packs, said that “makes some sense” and directed the authority to “revert… within a period of four weeks.”
That is the confirmed record. Reports claiming fresh fireworks or quotes from an August 2026 hearing are not backed by an order we’ve seen. What is backed: the BJP‑led Centre’s regulator promised a star‑rating maze while the Court asked for simple warnings people can read. Telangana’s interest is boringly practical — labels that actually warn. Delhi can keep deferring; hypertension and diabetes won’t.