Mandatory BIS certification for packaged drinking water remains enforceable through concurrent food safety and standards regimes.

Packaged drinking water must comply with the notified Indian Standard and carry the prescribed BIS certification mark under the regulatory framework discussed. The text states that Rule 49(28) of the PFA Rules made BIS certification mandatory, and that non-compliance could be proceeded against under both the BIS Act and the PFA Act because the remedies were concurrent. It further notes that the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 did not yet displace the existing enforcement regime for the relevant provisions, so coordinated regulatory action remained required against manufacturers and sellers operating without the required licence or certification.

---

---

Issues: Whether packaged drinking water can be manufactured or sold only in compliance with the prescribed standards and with the BIS Certification Mark, whether violation can be proceeded against under both the BIS Act and the PFA Act, and whether the authorities were obliged to take effective enforcement action.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 showed that packaged drinking water is required to conform to the notified Indian Standard and to carry the prescribed mark. Rule 49(28) of the PFA Rules made BIS certification mandatory for such product, while the BIS Act independently treated sale without the requisite standard compliance and mark as an offence. The plea that action could not be taken unless the product already conformed to law was rejected as a complete misreading of the regulatory framework. The Court further held that the PFA and BIS remedies were concurrent and one did not exclude the other. As the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 was not fully notified for the relevant operative provisions, it did not displace the existing enforcement regime. On that basis, effective coordinated enforcement was required.

Conclusion: The authorities were bound to take action against manufacturers and sellers of packaged drinking water found operating without licence or BIS certification, and the writ petition succeeded to that extent.

Final Conclusion: The judgment affirmed mandatory compliance for packaged drinking water and directed coordinated regulatory enforcement through the concerned authorities.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute and rules create a mandatory quality and certification regime for a food product, non-compliance is independently actionable under each applicable enactment and the existence of one enforcement route does not exclude another.

---