The Jerusalem PostIsrael should stop treating the Kurds as a temporary ally - opinionESPNSeason preview: Rankings from 1-32 and what to know about every teamESPN DeportesBrasil dio vuelta un partidazo ante Australia, pero preocupa RaphinhaBollywood HungamaGondhal team meets Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis, appeals for financial support ahead of Oscar 2027 journeyDaily MaverickStudent protests and French public sector strike heap pressure on MacronRTP DesportoSalvador diz que Sporting de Braga "exige mais" do que o que foi apresentadoCollider‘Task’ Meets’ True Detective’ in Apple TV’s New Crime Thriller Trailer DebutSouth China Morning PostChina’s generative AI user base crosses 700 million, covering over half the populationMalay MailCould vanish by 2036: India races to save shrinking island with artificial reefs
The Daily Newsstand · Free, Always
Tuesday, September 29, 2026

Delhi high court questions FSSAI over order to Red Bull: 'Was a notice issued first?'

Translate

The Delhi high court on Monday asked the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) whether it had issued a notice to Red Bull before directing the company to discontinue using the descriptor “Energy Drink” for its products.

A bench of Justice Amit Mahajan directed FSSAI’s counsel to seek instructions on the issue and listed the matter for hearing on September 29.

“If there is no notice, it has to go,” the bench remarked.

The court issued the direction while hearing a petition filed by Red Bull challenging FSSAI’s June 30 order directing the company to stop using the descriptor “Energy Drink” on its range of caffeinated beverages.

The petition also challenged a subsequent July 17 communication asking food safety officers across states and Union Territories to take action against products allegedly found to be non-compliant.

Also Read | 'No control over own officers': Sanjay Raut claims FDA trying to extort money from hotels, Mundhe seeks proof

Red Bull contended that the June 30 order was issued without a show-cause notice or an opportunity to be heard.

It further claimed that the July communication resulted in enforcement action, including the seizure of its products at multiple locations across the country.

The company also argued that the latest directive represented an unexplained departure from the licences, import clearances and no-objection certificates issued to it over the years for products carrying the same descriptor.

View the original on Hindustan Times →

KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.