With Monday’s decline, Swiggy shares have dropped over 4% over the last two trading sessions.
The notices, issued on Saturday, require Swiggy Instamart to submit a detailed explanation and a compliance report. The regulator said failure to comply could result in appropriate legal action.
FSSAI has sought documentary evidence explaining the alleged non-compliances and the circumstances surrounding the reported incidents. It has also directed the company to furnish details of its quality assurance systems, food safety monitoring processes, inventory management, stock rotation, hygiene standards, storage and handling practices and the internal controls implemented to ensure compliance with food safety regulations.
Also read: Swiggy, Eternal shares jump up to 20% in one month. Should you buy or avoid?
What did FSSAI say in the order?
According to the notices, Swiggy Instamart received multiple consumer complaints alleging the supply of expired, spoiled, rotten, contaminated or otherwise unsafe food products.
The regulator said ‘NOICE Eggs’ were marketed under a brand name not covered by the product categories approved under the existing FSSAI licence. It noted that the company had previously been instructed not to market the product unless it was covered under a valid licence and to seek a modification to its licence, if required.
FSSAI also alleged that ‘Healthify 100% Whey Protein (1 kg)’ and ‘NOICE Homestyle Madras Mixture with Peanuts’ were supplied after their expiry dates. It further observed that ‘Akshayakalpa Organic Egg’ was expired, rotten and contaminated, rendering it unfit for human consumption.
Read more: ETtech Explainer: Has Swiggy become Indian-owned after a drop in foreign ownership?
The regulator further stated that an infant food formulation was found to be in a severely deteriorated and unsafe condition, with signs of contamination and improper storage and handling. According to the notice, the same product was allegedly supplied again to the consumer after the defective item had been returned.
The notices also alleged that the company failed to provide a satisfactory response, grievance redressal or corrective action despite the complaints being forwarded or escalated. In one instance, the notice stated that Swiggy Instamart offered a refund without addressing the food safety concerns raised by the customer.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)