The Supreme Court told the Centre that it should be concerned about the health of young children who were "addicted" to unhealthy snacks. (Image generated using AI)The Supreme Court on Thursday pulled up the country’s food regulator, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), for not yet introducing Front-of-Pack Warning Labels (FOPWL) on packaged food products to indicate levels of sugar, salt, and saturated fats.A bench of Justice J B Pardiwala said it understood that there may be pressure from the industry and asked if the authorities did not want people, especially children, to grow up healthy. The court gave the government a last chance, asking it to place its final decision on record in two weeks, failing which, the bench said it would issue directions.Hearing a plea by Kerala-based non-profit organisation 3S and Our Health Society, the Supreme Court had in February this year asked the Centre to consider introducing FOPW labels.On Thursday, the counsel for the petitioner referred to the minutes of an FSSAI meeting and said it appeared to not be in favour of such labelling.Justice Pardiwala asked Additional Solicitor General Brijender Chahar, who appeared for the Centre, “Are you taking the court for a toss?… We are doing this in public interest. Keep it in mind. We are not doing it for ourselves. Why are you not abiding by our order? What have you done so far? We know the pressure on you. Will you do it on your own or should we pass an order?”Also Read | ‘All luxury litigations’: SC declines to hear PIL on packaged drinking water standardsCentre cites ‘namkeen’ exampleChahar sought to explain that one-third of micro, small, and medium enterprises are based on traditional foods and following such labelling would run the risk of marking almost all traditional Indian food products unhealthy. “Namkeen and even eggs would have red symbol, meaning unhealthy,” he said, adding that it was not necessary to blindly imitate an international format as those foods are distinct in character from Indian ones.To this, Justice Pardiwala said, “Even without red label, everybody knows. This will create public awareness. You should be concerned about the health of young children. They are addicted. Manufacturers may not like this as it affects their business, but why are you (government) reluctant to do this?”Story continues below this adThe bench also declined to hear some manufacturers. “You have no say in this…You are a manufacturer. There is something to do with the health of citizens. Why are you so desperate?” Justice Pardiwala said.The court pointed out that it was not against any specific product but only wanted people to know what they were consuming.Responding to the submission that India need not match international norms, the bench said, “Should India remain an underdeveloped country?…The world should know India is concerned about the health of its citizens, more particularly children.”What the FSSAI had proposedIn an affidavit filed earlier this year, the FSSAI had said that it proposed to implement a Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labelling (FOPNL) which indicates the overall nutritional value. It told the court that “this format is in line with global practices and adopts a star-rating system that presents simplified nutrition information on the front-of-pack of pre-packaged foods and provide information on the overall nutritional value of the food and/or on nutrients included in the FOPNL…It is designed to provide consumers with simplified, easy-to-understand information on nutritional content, assisting them in making healthier dietary choices.”