India’s apex food regulator has publicly called for every state to appoint a dedicated food safety commissioner, singling out Maharashtra’s appointment of Tukaram Mundhe as a model worth emulating. Rajit Punhani, Chief Executive Officer of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), made the remarks while commending the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its institutional structure, signalling a sharper push from the central regulator for stronger state-level food safety governance.
Speaking on the matter, Punhani emphasised that having a state-level food safety commissioner in place is no longer optional. “If there’s a will, there’s a way,” he said, characterising the dedicated commissioner post as a necessity rather than a procedural appointment. The endorsement marks one of the clearest public statements by the central regulator on the administrative architecture it expects from state food safety departments.
The proposal matters because enforcement capacity across India’s states has historically varied widely. Several states have lacked a full-time, senior officer exclusively responsible for food safety, with the portfolio often combined with drugs administration or assigned to officers juggling multiple regulatory responsibilities. Where the food safety mandate is shared or treated as a secondary portfolio, enforcement tends to be reactive and inconsistent, according to public health practitioners who have tracked state FDA performance.
Maharashtra’s appointment of Mundhe to a dedicated food safety commissioner role has been held up by FSSAI as evidence that administrative prioritisation can produce clearer lines of accountability. The Maharashtra FDA has, in recent years, pursued several high-profile enforcement actions against food businesses found violating safety standards. The appointment of a senior officer with a dedicated mandate is intended to consolidate direction over inspections, sampling, licensing, and prosecution functions that were previously dispersed.
The remarks also reflect FSSAI’s longstanding frustration with the uneven implementation of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which assigns primary enforcement responsibility to state commissioners but allows considerable flexibility in how states organise their administrations. The central regulator sets standards, but the daily work of inspection, sampling, and prosecution rests with state governments, making governance structure a critical determinant of outcomes on the ground.
Analysis: Punhani’s public backing of a state-level commissioner model points to a likely escalation in FSSAI’s engagement with state governments on administrative reform. By singling out a single state’s structure, the regulator is effectively signalling to laggard states that institutional will, rather than resource constraints, is the binding factor. The framing also suggests FSSAI may use future assessments of state performance to benchmark whether a dedicated commissioner post exists, potentially tying compliance reviews to governance architecture. For Maharashtra, the validation from the central regulator carries reputational weight at a time when state FDAs are under increasing scrutiny over food adulteration cases and inconsistent enforcement. The political undertones of the Mundhe appointment, given his reputation as a controversial administrative figure, also mean the endorsement is not a neutral administrative observation. Critics have previously raised questions about Mundhe’s posting decisions and confrontational style in earlier roles, and FSSAI’s public praise places the regulator implicitly on one side of a continuing debate over how state enforcement should be led.
The call comes against a backdrop of recurring food safety incidents across India. Adulterated milk, contaminated spices, the use of banned chemicals in street food, and the reuse of cooking oil beyond safe limits have repeatedly exposed gaps in enforcement at the district and state levels. National surveys have consistently found that a significant share of commonly consumed food samples fail basic safety tests, though the precise figures vary by state and commodity. The reputational cost of these incidents has risen as urban consumers and food delivery platforms have demanded greater assurance of compliance.
What to watch next: the response from state governments that currently lack a dedicated commissioner post, particularly large states with complex food markets such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and West Bengal. Any move by FSSAI to formally condition central funding, training, or performance rankings on the appointment of a dedicated commissioner would convert the current rhetorical push into an administrative lever. Maharashtra’s own enforcement record under Mundhe will be closely tracked as a test case for whether the dedicated commissioner model produces measurable improvements in inspection coverage, prosecution rates, and laboratory turnaround times.
The broader question is whether institutional reform at the top of each state FDA can translate into better outcomes at the level of the neighbourhood sweet shop, the dairy collection centre, and the roadside eatery, where most food safety violations are first visible. Punhani’s remarks suggest FSSAI believes that fixing the top of the pyramid is a necessary first step. Whether states follow will determine whether the regulator’s endorsement becomes a turning point or another set of well-attended words.
Sources
Hindustan Times: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/fssai-ceo-rajit-punhani-praises-maharashtra-fdas-tukaram-mundhe-101788338986864.html
Source: Hindustan Times – India News
Corrections
If you believe this article contains an error, contact Herald Express with the source URL and supporting evidence.
Story synopsis gathered from: Hindustan Times – India News — source
