Why huge price difference between same ISI Marked Products under different brand names ?

How shelf life of food products is certified ? 

On 26 November 2012, I had sent following e-mail to the firm marketing the product, WRO, DDGW, Secretary (CA). As no body replied, I sent a reminder on 14 December 2012.

"Recently I purchased a 500 ml PET bottle of Packaged Drinking Water (PDW) at Cafe Coffee Day in New Delhi. This PDW has been manufactured by Om Shanti Agro Industries, Dhule (Maharashtra) under their BIS License No. CM/L- 7699108 under brand name Coffee Day.

I have two queries which I hope you will answer in a pro-active manner:
1) The price charged is Rs. 15 for 500 ml whereas other manufacturers are charging Rs. 12 for 1000 ml. PDW under all these brands are marked with ISI Mark as per IS 14543. Why this difference in price?
2) You have specified shelf life of PDW as "Best Before 6 months From DOM". On what basis this shelf life has been specified? Were any shelf life studies were done and if yes then please inform the details of these studies.

Will you please enlighten me on above queries?

I am marking this e-mail to WRO BIS also for enlightening me on above queries and Secretary (CA) for appropriate action.

WRO, BIS
WRO may please inform me the results of tests carried on shelf life by the licensee and by BIS on factory and market samples derawn by BIS. Please also inform if BIS also has any role to play in fixing the price of ISI Marked products. After all BIS is under Ministry of Consumer Affairs. Recently Secretary (CA) addressing the gathering on Vigilance Awareness Week organized by BIS in New Delhi emphasized the need to build up confidence of the common consumers in BIS certified products which are procured/purchased commonly by the organized consumers as well as common consumers (TOI of 6th November 2012).

Secretary (CA)
This matter relates to the interest of consumers. Please take necessary action on the feedback as you consider appropriate."

You are all aware that BIS is under administrative control of Department of Consumer Affairs. I think the marketing firm, BIS and controlling ministry should  answer these queries. As a consumer it is my right and I hope that this right has not been put in abeyance as I was compulsorily retired from BIS and is in the habit of sending complaints against wrong doings of BIS top management.

Note - If anybody in BIS or elsewhere finds anything defamatory in this post/comments, he or she is welcome to bring it to my notice for needed modification or deletion.

ISI Mark - Has it become a tool for cheating consumer

Part IV - Bad quality ISI Mark CFL 

In my last post, I wrote about how packaged drinking water is being marketed without testing by BIS licensees under its compulsory ISI Mark scheme.  Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL) is yet another product where consumer is being cheated by licensees behind false claims of BIS about ISI Mark. Like drinking water CFL is also under mandatory certification by BIS.

BIS has so far granted 57 licenses for CFL and earns a minimum of Rs. 85 lakhs every year. Consumers pay a very high price for these CFL, but what they get in return? Let me show this by my personal experience.

I bought 2 CFL of 5W and 8W of HPL brand and one CFL of 15W of Havells brand. As per manufacturers’ declaration the life of these CFL should have been 4 years @ of 4 hrs/day, but one HPL CFL failed within a year itself (manufactured in Nov 10’), other HPL CFL failed within 2 years (manufactured in June 09’) and Havells CFL failed in a year (purchased in July 10’). The usage was not more than 3 hrs/day in case of all three CFL.

Four more CFL of other brands are in use in my house. I am watching their performance.

I invite you to share your experience. 

ISI Mark - Has it become a tool for cheating consumer

Part III - Packaged drinking water in 250 ml PP Glasses

Today in a family  function, guests were served packageddrinking water in 250 ml PP Glasses. Click on the image to see the marking details. Batch No, and Packing Date are not marked. I checked thecardboard carton also. It was blank, no information printed.

Is this the way licensees are allowed to market PDW with ISI Mark?

Manufacturer has declared shelf life as 90 days from date of manufacturing. WHICH DATE OF MANUFACTURING? Also, had BIS ever checked and verified this shelf life as declared by the manufacturer?

I also visited BIS Website. Variety covered (at S. No. 36 of List of Licensees for Delhi) - 20 litre PET Jar. When I clicked on this a page was opened where variety covered is litre PET Jar and 250 ml PP Glasses. Which is correct? 

No batch No., no Packing date, this is how manufacturers market drinking water with ISI Mark without testing and hide production to save on MF. BIS officers take bribe and turn a blind eye. The are not even bothered that such untested drinking water is a health hazard for consumers. 

ISI Mark – Has it become a Tool For Cheating Consumer

Part II Packaged Drinking Water

Govt. of India has made ISI Marking mandatory for Packaged Drinking Water (PDW) for safety and health of consumers. In this part I will demonstrate if ISI mark is ensuring the quality of PDW or is cheating the consumer.

As per GOI order, PDW should conform to Indian Standard, IS 14543. The STI prescribed for this by BIS is Doc: STI/14543/6, August 2005 as per IS 14543: 2005 with 2 amendments. Let us find out how BIS ensures compliance of following requirements of STI:

Clause 1.0 LABORATORY- A laboratory shall be maintained, which shall be suitably equipped and staffed, where different tests given in the specification shall be carried out in accordance with the methods given in the specification. AND

Clause 13.0 STOP MARKING - The marking of the product shall be stopped under intimation to the Bureau if, at any time, there is some difficulty in maintaining the conformity of the product to the specification, or the testing equipment goes out of order. The marking may be resumed as soon as the defects are removed under intimation to BIS.

In December 2009, Vigilance department of BIS carried out raids on three licensees of PDW in Mumbai. During this raid following serious discrepancies amongst others were found:

a)       QC in-charge, responsible for testing of PDW, was found incompetent.

b)      Some testing equipment were found missing and some were found faulty.

c)       Test records were maintained without doing actual testing.

d)      PDW dispatched in the market without testing.

After the raids, local BIS office was informed and routine actions were taken. Licensees were advised to stop marking, they took corrective actions which were verified by local office and self-marking rights were restored.

Now let us see, what was not checked and how consumer was cheated.

It was clear that Packaged Drinking Water was sent in the market without testing but BIS officers did not check from which date it was being marketed without testing. They did not advise the licensees to immediately withdraw all Packaged Drinking Water available in the market. They did not advise the licensee to issue a notice in the media that consumers should not buy and consume Packaged Drinking Water of their brands as the same was not tested. Inspite of knowing it that Packaged Drinking Water available in the market (of these brands) could cause health problems to consumers as it has not been tested, BIS officers did not take any corrective and preventive action.

Under clause 13.0 of STI, licensees were required to stop marking on their own and inform BIS about it, but they did not comply with this statutory requirement. BIS officers also failed to record this serious discrepancy and did not seek licensees’ explanation on this. This is one requirement which is not checked in any BIS inspection and consumer, unknown of the potential health hazard, is left to consume hazardous ISI marked products. If this is not cheating and stabbing the consumer in the back then what else will constitute cheating and stabbing in back?

Were these BIS officers incompetent or they intentionally failed to protect consumer interest for some favour from the licensees. I have posted these “cheat the consumer” real stories of BIS on my blog MANAK. If you want to read the details then click on the following links:

Unit 1                Unit 2                Unit 3

ISI Mark – Symbol of ‘Quality’ or ‘Cheating’?

You must have seen a mark on various products you use and which is popularly known as ISI Mark. As per the information available on the website of Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), presence of this mark on a product is an assurance of conformity to the specifications. Use of this mark is allowed to product manufacturers (licensees) under Product Certification Scheme of BIS which aims at providing Third Party Guarantee of quality, safety and reliability of products to the ultimate customer (consumer). The conformity is ensured by regular surveillance of the licensee's performance by surprise inspections and testing of samples, drawn both from the factory and market. Click here to read details on BIS website.

When BIS's predecessor, the Indian Standards Institution (ISI) began operating this product certification Scheme in 1955, this concept was unknown to Indian consumer. With hard and sincere work put in by ISI officers and staff, the concept started gaining confidence of Indian consumer, and soon ISI Mark became a household name. The mark became a symbol of quality both for individual consumers and bulk buyers.

In 1986, ISI became BIS through a legislative Act of the Indian Parliament, known as the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986, With change in name, entire culture of ISI changed. It became a pleasure ground of IAS officers who changed its character from a S&T organization to a bureaucratic organization. Today three top positions of BIS are occupied by IAS. Head of vigilance department is also an IAS. Efforts are on way to post IAS officers in regions also.

A Joint Parliamentary Committee was constituted by the Parliament on 22.08.2003 on Pesticide Residues in and Safety Standards for Soft Drinks, Fruit Juice and Other Beverages, under the Chairmanship of Sharad Pawar. One of the recommendations of JPC was that BIS should be headed by an eminent scientist who can infuse dynamism in its working. As the fate would have it, Sharad Pawar became Minister of Consumer Affairs in the next government and in that capacity became President of BIS. It was most unfortunate that as JPC Chairman, he had recommended that BIS should be headed by an eminent scientist but as BIS President he did not implement his own recommendation. After becoming President BIS, he started sending IAS officers as DG BIS and soon BIS top was packed with IAS officers.

For majority of consumers, ISI mark is no more a symbol of quality. They are least bothered whether the product he is buying is marked with ISI Mark or not. There is a joke –

Consumer 1 asked Consumer 2, ‘do you use ISI Marked products?’

'No', replied Consumer 2.

‘You must have worked in BIS’, observed Consumer 1. 

Through ISI Mark scheme, third party guarantee of quality, safety and reliability of products and their conformity to standards is claimed to be ensured by regular surveillance of the licensee's performance by surprise inspections and testing of samples, drawn both from the factory and market. As per Certification Regulations, minimum two surprise inspections should be carried out. In each inspection, minimum one sample should be tested in factory and minimum one sample should be drawn from factory for testing in an independent laboratory. In addition, after each inspection, minimum one sample should be drawn from market for testing in an independent laboratory.

I filed a RTI with BIS to provide information about 30 licenses of electric cables in Delhi and audited the information provided. Here are the findings of the audit:

a) No inspection was done in the whole year in case of 12 licenses.

b) Only one inspection was done in the whole year in case of 16 licenses.

c) Two inspections were done in the whole year in case of only 2 licenses.

d) Only 14 samples were tested in the factory against minimum 60 samples.

e) Only 13 samples were taken from the factory for independent testing against minimum 60 samples.

f) Only 3 samples were procured from the market for independent testing against minimum 60 samples.

How BIS can guarantee the quality of ISI marked products with above 'almost nil' monitoring? Required numbers of inspections are not carried out and also required numbers of samples are not tested. If it is not cheating then what else?  

For details of the above audit you can click on the following links:

Citizen Audit of BIS Product Certification (ISI Mark) Scheme 

No of inspections 

Testing of ISImarked products

आईएसआई मार्क और उत्पाद की गुणवत्ता ???

आईएसआई मार्क भारतीय मानक ब्‍यूरो (भामाब्यूरो) की प्रमाणन मुहर है जो उन उत्पादों पर लगाई जाती है जो भामाब्यूरो द्वारा प्रमाणित हैं. किसी उत्पाद पर इस प्रमाणन चिन्‍ह (मानक मुहर) की उपस्थिति इस बात का आश्‍वासन है कि उत्पाद की गुणवत्ता राष्ट्रीय मानक के अनुरूप है और इसे भामब्यूरो द्वारा पूरी जांच-पड़ताल के बाद ही स्वीकृत किया गया है.

भारतीय मानक ब्‍यूरो (पहला नाम - भारतीय मानक संस्था, वर्ष १९४७ में गठित की गई) को भारतीय संसद द्वारा पारित विधान, भारतीय मानक ब्‍यूरो अधिनियम १९८६, के अंतर्गत गठित किया गया है. भामाब्यूरो केंद्र सरकार के 'उपभोक्ता मामले मंत्रालय' के नियंत्रण में एक स्वायत्त संस्था है. इस अधिनियम द्वारा प्रदत वैधानिक अधिकार से भामाब्यूरो एक 'उत्‍पाद प्रमाणन योजना' चला रहा है. यह उत्पाद प्रमाणन योजना १९५५ में आरंभ हुई थी. इसके अंतर्गत लाइसेंसधारी को प्रमाणन मुहर (आईएसआई मार्क) के स्व-उपयोग की स्‍वीकृति दी जाती है. भामब्यूरो अब तक विभिन्न उत्पाद निर्माताओं को ३५००० से अधिक लाइसेंस स्‍वीकृत कर चूका हैं, जिसमें कृषि, वस्‍त्रादि, पेय/खाद्य पदार्थ, विद्युत्/इलैक्‍ट्रॉनिक उत्पाद, रसोई गैस के सिलिंडर एवं वाल्व, गहराई से पानी निकलने के हस्तचालित पम्प, स्टील/पीवीसी निर्मित पीने/कृषि योग्य जल आपूर्ति के ट्यूब्स शामिल है.  भारतीय उपभोक्ता ने आईएसआई मार्क में अपना पूरा विश्वास व्यक्त किया, पर पिछले कुछ वर्षों से आईएसआई मार्क से उपभोक्ताओं का विश्वास उठता जा रहा है. कुछ लोग तो यहाँ तक कहते सुने जाते हैं कि स्वयं भामब्यूरो के कर्मचारी आईएसआई मार्क उत्पाद नहीं खरीदते.

भामाब्‍यूरो उत्‍पाद प्रमाणन योजना एक स्‍वैच्छिक योजना है और अंतर्राष्ट्रीय मानकीकरण संस्था (आईएसओ)  द्वारा प्रकाशित मार्गदर्शिका २८ पर आधारित है. इस मार्गदर्शिका के अंतर्गत भामाब्‍यूरो फैक्‍टरी का प्रारंभिक परीक्षण एवं उस की 'गुणता प्रबंध पद्धति' का  मूल्‍यांकन करता है और उत्‍पाद की गुणवत्ता की मानकों से अनुरूपता को निर्धारित व स्‍वीकृत करता है. यह स्‍वीकृति फैक्‍टरी के गुणता प्रबंध पद्धति की निगरानी व फैक्‍टरी से लिए गए नमूनों की स्वतंत्र प्रयोगशालाओं में जांच के बाद ही दी जाती है. सभी भामाब्‍यूरो प्रमाणन भारतीय मानकों के अनुसार किए जातें हैं. भामब्यूरो अपनी लगातार निगरानी द्वारा ब्यूरो द्वारा प्रमाणित उत्पादों की गुणता पर पैनी नजर रखता है. इसके लिए ब्यूरो के अधिकारी समय-समय पर फेक्ट्री में बिना बताये जा कर इंस्पेक्शन करते हैं, फेक्ट्री और बाजार से उत्पाद के नमूने ले कर उनकी स्वतंत्र प्रयोगशालाओं में गुणवत्ता जांच की जाती है. किसी प्रकार की कोई भी कमी पाए जाने पर उस का विस्तृत अध्ययन किया जाता है और मूल कारणों का पता लगाया जाता है और कमी के लिए जिम्मेदार कारणों को दूर किया जाता है. यदि उत्पाद निर्माता उस कमी को जल्दी दूर नहीं कर पाता है तब उस से आईएसआई मार्क लगाने का स्व-अधिकार वापस ले लिया जाता है. यह अधिकार उसे तब ही वापस मिलता है जब गुणवत्ता में कमी के सारे कारणों को प्रभावशाली तरीके से दूर कर दिया जाता है और ब्यूरो के सक्षम अधिकारी पूर्ण रूप से अपनी संतुष्टि कर लेते हैं. ऐसा न होने पर उत्पाद निर्माता से लाईसेंस वापस ले लिया जाता है. ग्राहक भी उत्पाद गुणवत्ता में कमी पाए जाने पर ब्यूरो को शिकायत कर सकता है. ब्यूरो अधिकारी शिकायत की तुरंत जांच करते हैं और शिकायत सही पाए जाने पर ख़राब उत्पाद के स्थान पर सही उत्पाद दिलवाया जाता है.

यह बहुत अधिक दुःख का विषय है कि आईएसआई मार्क की अपनी गुणवत्ता और विश्वसनीयता पर ही प्रश्न चिन्ह लग गया है. इस के लिए ब्यूरो, ब्यूरो अधिकारी, ब्यूरो की नीतियों और कार्यविधियों में बिना पूर्ण विचार के किये  गए परिवर्तन, मंत्रालय का अनावश्यक हस्तक्छेप काफी हद तक जिम्मेदार हैं. ब्यूरो एक साइंटिफिक संस्था है पर काफी समय से इस के महानिदेशक और अन्य पदों पर आईएएस अधिकारियों की गैरकानूनी नियुक्ति की जा रही है. यह ब्यूरो की गिरती साख का मुख्य कारण है.
 
कहानी बहुत लम्बी है पर ग्राहकों को सुनानी जरूरी है. इस लिए मैं इसे एक लेख श्रंखला के रूप में प्रकाशित कर रहा हूँ. आगे के भागों में विस्तार से गुणवत्ता हनन की कथा पर चर्चा की जायेगी. 

नोट - हर उत्पाद के लिए मानक मुहर अलग गजट की जाती है. इस के ऊपर भारतीय मानक का नंबर होता है और नीचे लाईसेंस नंबर.    

यह कैसा उपभोक्ता संरक्षण है?

भारत सरकार का एक मंत्रालय है - उपभोक्ता मामले, खाध्य एवं सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय. इसके मंत्री हैं श्री शरद पवार, राज्य मंत्री हैं प्रो. के वी थामस. इस मंत्रालय के अंतर्गत एक विभाग है - उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग. इस विभाग के अंतर्गत है - भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो. भामाब्यूरो भारत की राष्ट्रीय मानक संस्था है. इस के महा-निदेशक हैं श्री शरद गुप्ता, आईएएस. अब यह मत पूछियेगा कि एक आईएएस इस साइंटिफिक संस्था में क्या कर रहा है? यही तो इस देश का दुर्भाग्य है कि यह सरकारी बाबू हर जगह घुसे हुए हैं और इन्होनें हर संस्था की हालत बुरी कर रखी है.

भामाब्यूरो, भारतीय संसद द्वारा पारित विधान "भारतीय मानक ब्‍यूरो अधिनियम १९८६" द्वारा प्रदत शक्ति से एक 'उत्‍पाद प्रमाणन योजना' चला रहा है जिसके अंतर्गत लाइसेंसधारी को मानक मुहर (आईएसआई मार्क) को अपने उत्पाद पर लगाने की स्‍वीकृति मिल जाती है. भामाब्यूरो की यह उत्‍पाद प्रमाणन योजना आईएसओ मार्गदर्शिका २८ पर आधारित है. इस योजना के अंतर्गत फैक्‍टरी की गुणता प्रबध पद्धति का मूल्‍यांकन किया जाता है, जिसमें फेक्ट्री की उत्पाद निर्माण छमता, परीक्षण छमता, कर्मचारियों की योग्यता एवं छमता का मूल्यांकन शामिल है. उत्‍पाद की मानक अनुरूपता को जांचने के लिए फैक्‍टरी में उत्पाद के नमूनों का परीक्षण किया जाता है. इसके अलाबा फेक्ट्री से लिए गए नमूनों का स्वतंत्र प्रयोगशालाओं में परीक्षण किया जाता है. सब कुछ सही पाए जाने पर ही मानक मुहर के उपयोग की स्‍वीकृति दी जाती है। इस मुहर का अर्थ यह है कि उत्पाद सम्बंधित राष्ट्रीय मानक की अपेक्षाओं के अनुरूप है.

पहले एक वर्ष में चार बार फेक्ट्री का निरीक्षण किया जाता था, एक वर्ष में उत्पाद के चार नमूनों का फेक्ट्री में परीक्षण किया जाता था. एक वर्ष में फेक्ट्री से लिए चार नमूनों का स्वतंत्र प्रयोगशाला में परीक्षण किया जाता था. एक वर्ष में उत्पाद के चार नमूने बाजार से खरीदे जाते थे और उनका स्वतंत्र प्रयोगशाला में परीक्षण किया जाता था. अब शायद सरकार और ब्यूरो को उपभोक्ता संरक्षण की उतनी चिंता नहीं रही. अब विधान में परिवर्तन कर दिया गया है - एक वर्ष में दो निरीक्षण, दो नमूने फेक्ट्री में, दो नमूने फेक्ट्री से लेकर और दो बाजार से खरीद कर परीक्षण करने का नियम बनाया गया है. इस नियम का भी पूरी तरह पालन नहीं किया जाता. न निरीक्षण पूरा होता है और न परीक्षण पूरा. कुछ केसेज में तो दो वर्ष बीत गए पर न निरीक्षण किया गया न परीक्षण.

एक और आघात जो इस योजना पर किया गया है वह है - अब अधिकतर निरीक्षण बाहर के लोगों से कराये जाते हैं. यह लोग भामाब्यूरो के निरीक्षकों के मुकाबले में योग्यता, अनुभव और ट्रेनिंग में काफी कमजोर हैं. एक मुख्य बात यह भी है कि इन बाहरी निरीक्षकों की सेवाएँ कानून का उल्लंघन करके ली जा रही हैं. इन बाहरी निरीक्षकों द्वारा अब तक जितने भी निरीक्षण किये गए हैं वह कानून की द्रष्टि से गैर-कानूनी हैं.

मैंने यह बात ब्यूरो और सरकार में हर स्तर पर उठा रखी है, प्रधानमंत्री और राष्ट्रपति तक. कुछ महीने पहले मेरा एक साक्षात्कार दूरदर्शन पर भी प्रसारित हुआ था. पर न ब्यूरो में और न ही सरकार में इस पर कोई कार्यवाही की गई है.

यह कैसा उपभोक्ता संरक्षण है?

Sub-standard ISI Marked Products

Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) operates a third-party product certification scheme under which it grants licenses to product manufacturers to use ISI Mark on their products. ISI mark on a iproduct means that the product conforms to the relevant Indian Standard. For the benefit of consumers, BIS issues advertisements in the media. One such advertisement issued by BIS is shown in the image. CLICK to read it.

In this advertisement, BIS has used a term 'sub-standard' but has not defined it. Does it mean that any product not having this mark is 'sub-standard', or a product having this mark can also be 'sub-standard'? I wrote an e-mail to BIS bit BIS did not reply. I sent three reminders but still no reply. Is BIS really concerned about the interest and safety of consumers., or issuing this advertisement is only a formality to indicate so in its annual report or satisfying consumer NGOs?

To read my e-mail, CLICK here.

I am now filing a RTI application to get the information. I will share it on this blog as soon as I get it.

Sharad Pawar's ministry compromises interest of Indian Consumer - BIS Registration Scheme notified

Details of the registration scheme (closely guarded secret of DOCA and BIS) are now available in BIS Rules, 1987. A new chapter IV A has been inserted. Notification issued in this regard will posted on the blog shortly. This notification has been merged in the BIS Rules.

Read the details of the scheme and offer your comments.

From first hurried reading the only term comes to my mind is - stupid piece of legislation. I will like to know, which stupid person drafted this.

Registration Scheme is nothing but distorted image of Product Certification Scheme. By notifying this scheme, Ministry of Consumer Affairs has compromised the interest of Indian Consumer.

BIS Product Certification is based on ISO/IEC Guide 28 which

gives general guidelines for a specific product certification system.

It is applicable to a third-party product certification system for determining the conformity of a product with specified requirements through initial testing of samples of the product, assessment and surveillance of the involved quality system, and surveillance by testing of product samples taken from the factory or the open market, or both. ISO/IEC Guide 28:2004 addresses conditions for use of a mark of conformity and conditions for granting a certificate of conformity.

BIS Product Certification scheme was first distorted by Simplified Procedure and now further distorted by this scheme. All essential elements like

determining the conformity of a product with specified requirements through initial testing of samples of the product, assessment and surveillance of the involved quality system, and surveillance by testing of product samples taken from the factory or the open market, or both, are missing in this Registration Scheme.

Why first BIS and now BIS plus ministry are out to compromise the interest of the consumer? All controls on manufacturers

are being

relaxed one after the other. Appointment of agents, grant of licenses based on the report of chartered engineer, recognizing self-test report and now this registration scheme are all to please the manufacturers and sacrifice the interest of the consumer.