Centre Hijacking Powers: Maharashtra FDA Takes FSSAI to Bombay High Court

Short answer: The State of Maharashtra has approached the Bombay High Court in a constitutional dispute against the Union government and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). Filed through the State Commissioner of Food Safety, the writ petition accuses the central regulator of creating an unauthorized parallel bureaucracy that strips state food safety officers of their statutory inspection powers. The state has urged the High Court to quash central restrictions, stay a controversial May 2023 FSSAI circular, and return administrative control of digital registration records to state officers when the bench hears the matter on November 26, 2026.

1. What the state petition alleges

The petition marks a rare legal showdown between a state enforcement body and the Union health ministry over regulatory boundaries.

The Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006, consolidated older disparate food laws into a unified statutory framework. The Maharashtra FDA argues that Parliament deliberately structured this law as a decentralized administrative model. Under that framework, primary operational responsibilities for inspecting commercial dining establishments, granting manufacturing permits, collecting food samples, and launching prosecutions against errant food business operators were vested directly with the State Food Safety Commissioner and field officers.

According to the state petition, the FSSAI leadership has systematically dismantled this division of powers. Maharashtra alleges that the central Chief Executive Officer used subordinate regulatory instruments to establish an unauthorized nationwide enforcement structure. This machinery includes:

• Central Licensing Authorities: Central officials designated to issue business permits independently of state oversight.
• Central Food Safety Officers: Central inspectors deployed to conduct ground surveillance in local retail markets.
• Central Food Analysts: Central laboratories handling forensic testing outside state government custody.

The state contends that the parent 2006 statute provides no legal backing for these parallel positions. Under the original Act, the central authority is mandated to set national quality standards, coordinate scientific research, and inspect imported products arriving at international entry ports. Extending central oversight to routine inspections of neighbourhood bakeries, commercial kitchens, and manufacturing units constitutes regulatory overreach.

2. The May 2023 circular and FoSCoS portal conflict

The operational breaking point between Mumbai and New Delhi centers on an administrative circular issued by the FSSAI on May 12, 2023.

The contentious directive explicitly prohibited state FDA inspectors from entering, inspecting, or initiating penal action against commercial establishments holding a Central Licence. In practice, large food franchises, multi-city chain restaurants, major dairy processors, and high-volume packaging units secure central licences based on annual revenue thresholds.

Maharashtra FDA contends this circular created an artificial regulatory shelter:

• Erosion of local oversight: Local food safety inspectors received public complaints regarding adulteration or unsanitary kitchens in centrally licensed restaurants but were legally blocked from taking samples.
• Enforcement delays: Central officers based in regional hubs lacked the manpower to inspect thousands of licensed premises across Maharashtra districts, allowing compliance standards to slip.
• Dilution of public health response: In rapid contamination incidents, waiting for central intervention paralyzed municipal and district health authorities.

The writ petition also challenges the configuration of the central online portal, the Food Safety Compliance System (FoSCoS). The state alleges that the Centre structured the digital portal to funnel food business applicants toward the central licensing tier rather than state registers. Maharashtra has asked the Bombay High Court to compel the FSSAI to transfer all FoSCoS registration files and database records back to state custody, preventing central data monopolization similar to disputes over centralized customer databases and enterprise record access.

3. What’s missing / the federal footnote

The dispute before the Bombay High Court highlights a growing friction point in Indian administrative federalism.

Under the Constitution of India, public health and sanitation appear in Entry 6 of the State List, while the regulation of food adulteration falls under Entry 18 of the Concurrent List. When Parliament enacted the Food Safety and Standards Act in 2006, legislative debates affirmed that state machinery would remain the primary enforcement arm on the ground.

Similar tensions over centralized executive control have emerged across other economic sectors, from court challenges to central administrative summons to environmental clearances bypassing municipal consent in Karjat forest projects.

If the Bombay High Court rules in favor of Maharashtra on November 26, the judgment could trigger similar legal challenges from other states whose inspection revenues and enforcement powers have been circumscribed by central circulars. Conversely, food industry bodies argue that a unified central licensing umbrella reduces regional harassment and provides consistency for pan-India manufacturers. Resolving the conflict will determine whether food safety governance remains federalized or transitions into a unitary central regime.

Sources to check yourself

• Writ Petition documents, State of Maharashtra vs Union of India & FSSAI, Bombay High Court
• Full text and statutory provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
• Food Safety and Standards Authority of India administrative circular dated May 12, 2023
• India Today investigative reporting by Vidya on the Maharashtra FDA legal challenge, Mumbai

Frequently asked questions

Q: What did the May 12, 2023 FSSAI circular do? A: The circular barred state FDA inspectors from conducting inspections or taking enforcement action against food business operators holding a Central Licence.

Q: Why is Maharashtra FDA challenging the FoSCoS platform? A: The state alleges the digital compliance system was configured to direct food businesses into central licensing, bypassing state registers and weakening local revenue.

Q: When is the Bombay High Court scheduled to hear the petition? A: The writ petition filed by the State Commissioner of Food Safety is scheduled for its first substantive hearing on November 26, 2026.