Delhi High Court Notice on Sale of Junk Food around Schools

A healthy debate has started with the Delhi High Court issuing notices to various government departments and agencies on an NGO’s petition that sought a ban on the sale of junk food and carbonated drinks in and within a 500-yard radius of educational institutions.

The Delhi High Court on December 22 issued notices to Delhi government, the human resources development ministry, the ministry of health and family welfare, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and the directorate of education, Delhi.

A Delhi-based NGO for children's welfare, Uday Foundation, had approached the court to direct the government to develop a comprehensive school canteen policy that emphasises healthy nutrition among school children.

"At what cost is it okay for junk food to be available to them at school," asked advocate Rakesh Prabhakar, who appeared for the petitioner. "On the one hand, children are taught about good nutrition and the value of a healthy lifestyle inside classrooms; yet on the other hand we continue to make junk food available to them." The court asked the respondents to file a written reply by February 9 next year. It also asked the NGO to define "junk food" in its petition before the next hearing.

The petition cites data from the latest National Sample Survey Organisation report released by Delhi government, which says Delhiites spend an average of Rs 371 per month on processed food and beverages. However, when it comes to vegetables and fruits, they spend far less - Rs 290 on vegetables and one third of it on fruits.

It adds that in the US, various states have banned the sale of junk food in their schools.

"Junk food is a food that has poor nutritional value and is considered unhealthy," the petition says. "A food that is high in fat, sodium, and/ or sugar content is known as junk food. It has little enzyme- producing vitamins and minerals and contains high level of calories. Since junk food is high in fats and sugar, it is responsible for obesity, dental cavities, Type 2 diabetes and heart diseases."

As the HC decides on the petition, it will be interesting to see whether the decision tilts in favour of a healthy lifestyle or it is left for the consumers to decide what they wish to eat, so what if the consumers happen to be children.

With Inputs From Mail Today. Copyright 2010. MTNPL. All rights reserved.