The Bombay High Court, which has often criticised the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its enforcement action against state eateries, has now turned towards a Thane restaurant for using banned analog paneer.

Remarking that the Udupi Swaad restaurant from Thane needs to “suffer” for some time, the Bombay High Court refused immediate relief to the restaurant against FDA action.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad was hearing a plea by Udupi Swaad Restaurant from Wagle Estate, Thane against the food safety body’s action on August 11.

Story continues below this ad

“You need to suffer first as you have made people suffer by eating this (analog paneer)…Poetic justice. We will take a different strict view,” Acting CJ Ghuge said.

The suspension followed a June report that had declared its paneer sample unsafe and substandard.

The petitioner argued the action was taken without issuing a mandatory improvement notice under Section 32 of the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act, forcing its closure and causing revenue, livelihood, and reputation losses. However, Additional Government Pleader Vikrant Parshurami for the FDA justified the action as per the state-wide prohibition.

“Have you advertised in your menu card and inform or indicate customers you are serving them analog paneer and not the actual paneer? You are making people eat something rotten by making them believe that it is paneer and you are saying improvement notice should be given to you? Why don’t you advertise on your signboard that original food is not available with us? Acting CJ Ghuge orally questioned the petitioner.

Story continues below this ad

“People do not read everything and know what they are eating. You must be adding very nice spices and masala so that it tastes better and they may say it has a wonderful taste. Then they realise they are eating something rotten as instead of paneer they ate analog paneer,” the judge added.

After the petitioner assured that analog paneer would not be used again, Acting CJ Ghuge orally responded, “You must tell them what they are eating. How can you serve something that they (customers) have not asked for? You should be penalised and all those customers should go to the consumer forum and seek damages and costs.”

The court sought the FDA’s reply and posted the matter to September 7.