Food adulteration in India: Odisha safer than many states, but is testing enough?

Nearly one out of every five food samples tested in India fails to meet safety standards, according to data placed before Parliament. While Odisha’s numbers appear better than the national average, a closer look at the figures raises an important question; is the state doing enough testing to truly measure the scale of the problem?

The data, shared in the Rajya Sabha, outlines enforcement action taken under the Food Safety and Standards Act across states in the past two financial years.

National Alarm: 20% Failure Rate

In FY 2024–25, authorities tested 1,70,535 food samples across the country. Of these, 34,388 were found non-conforming, a failure rate of roughly 20 percent.

The pattern was nearly identical in FY 2023–24, when 33,808 out of 1,70,513 samples failed.

Even in the current financial year (FY 2025–26 so far), 27,567 out of 1,55,306 tested samples have been declared non-compliant.

The takeaway is clear: food adulteration and quality violations remain widespread.

Odisha’s Numbers: Better — But Not Clean

Odisha’s reported non-conformity rate is significantly lower than the national average.

FY 2023–24: 252 failures out of 2,003 samples (~12.6%)

FY 2024–25: 273 failures out of 2,282 samples (~11.9%)

On paper, Odisha performs better than the all-India average of 20 percent. The rate has also marginally declined.

However, nearly 12 percent of food samples failing safety norms still means that more than 1 in 10 tested items did not meet prescribed standards.

That is far from negligible.

The Bigger Question: Is Odisha Testing Enough?

While the percentage looks better, the volume of testing tells another story.

In FY 2024–25:

Uttar Pradesh tested over 30,000 samples

Tamil Nadu tested more than 18,000

Rajasthan tested nearly 14,000

West Bengal tested over 14,500

Odisha tested just 2,282 samples.

Given Odisha’s population and geographic spread, including tribal belts and rural markets, experts say testing numbers appear modest.

Lower sampling can sometimes mean lower detection.

States Under Severe Scrutiny

Some states reported extremely high levels of non-compliance.

Uttar Pradesh recorded 16,500 non-conforming samples in FY 2024–25, a failure rate exceeding 50 percent.

Rajasthan and Maharashtra also reported thousands of violations.

Such figures may reflect deeper adulteration issues, aggressive enforcement, or both.

Infrastructure Push: Labs and Mobile Testing Vans

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has expanded testing infrastructure nationwide:

246 NABL-accredited laboratories for primary testing

24 Referral Laboratories for appellate analysis

305 Mobile Food Testing Labs (Food Safety on Wheels) deployed across 35 States/UTs

These mobile units are designed to improve testing access in remote areas — something especially relevant for Odisha’s tribal districts.

However, state-wise deployment and impact of these mobile labs remain unclear from the data.

Where Odisha Stands

Odisha is not among the worst-performing states in terms of percentage violations. In fact, it is performing better than the national average.

But the relatively low sampling volume means the real picture may not be fully visible.

Food safety experts emphasize that strong enforcement often initially leads to higher detection rates before long-term compliance improves.

The real test for Odisha will be:

Expanding testing coverage

Increasing surveillance in rural and semi-urban markets

Ensuring strict penalties for violators

Publicly disclosing category-wise violations

Also Read: Strong bidder interest for Bhubaneswar Capital Region Ring Road; NHAI to award contracts by March

The Bottom Line

The data shows that food adulteration remains a nationwide concern, with nearly 20 percent of tested samples failing safety norms.

Odisha’s numbers are comparatively better,  but not flawless.

With over 11 percent of samples still failing and testing volumes relatively limited, the state faces a critical challenge: move from moderate enforcement to proactive, large-scale surveillance.

For consumers, the question remains simple — how safe is the food on their plate?

And for regulators, the answer lies not just in percentages, but in how extensively and transparently they test.