Skip to content
Loading map…

Khatta Meetha

3-1 Glenn Hawthorne Blvd Mississauga ON L5R 4J9 · Food Take Out

Inspection summary

Khatta Meetha has been inspected 6 times by Peel Public Health (Region of Peel) since November 6, 2024. The most recent inspection, on October 6, 2026, recorded 2 infractions.

1 of 6 inspections on record found no infractions at all. In the past 12 months there were 3 inspections with 6 infractions recorded. The higher-risk findings here relate to: Protecting food from contamination, Cleaning and sanitizing and Pests.

The number of infractions per inspection has stayed roughly the same over time.

What these findings mean

Health authorities word their violations differently, so we group them by what they mean for food safety. Higher-risk findings are the ones inspectors treat as critical, because they can directly make someone sick.

  • Protecting food from contaminationHigher risk

    This covers how food is stored, prepared and displayed: raw meat kept away from ready-to-eat food, food covered and stored off the floor, and nothing dripping or splashing into it. Cross-contamination from raw to cooked food is a direct route for salmonella and E. coli.

    Recorded 3 times across 3 separate inspections, most recently on October 6, 2026. For example: Did operator store food to prevent contamination and/or adulteration? (Significant Risk)

  • Cleaning and sanitizingHigher risk

    Anything that touches food, such as cutting boards, dishes and utensils, must be washed, rinsed and sanitized. Inspectors check dishwasher temperatures, sanitizer strength and how wiping cloths are stored. Poor sanitizing lets bacteria survive from one use to the next.

    Recorded 3 times across 3 separate inspections, most recently on April 21, 2026. For example: Did operator provide a test reagent to determine the concentration of sanitizer?

  • PestsHigher risk

    Signs of mice, rats, cockroaches or flies, or gaps and clutter that let them get in or hide. Pests carry bacteria and can contaminate food and surfaces, so evidence of activity is treated seriously and usually triggers a follow-up visit.

    Recorded once on November 6, 2024. For example: Did operator take adequate measures to maintain food premises in a condition that prevent harbourage or breeding of pests? (Significant Risk)

  • Equipment and utensilsLower risk

    Equipment has to be built from cleanable materials, kept in good repair and stored properly. These findings are mostly about upkeep, like a cracked shelf, a worn gasket or utensils stored the wrong way. They are generally lower risk but show how well the kitchen is maintained.

    Recorded 3 times across 3 separate inspections, most recently on April 21, 2026. For example: Did operator maintain non-food contact surfaces clean, sanitary and in good condition?

  • Building, plumbing and upkeepLower risk

    Floors, walls and ceilings must be smooth and clean, with working lighting, ventilation, plumbing, hot and cold water, and washrooms. These are rarely an immediate food-safety risk on their own, but persistent problems can lead to pest or sanitation issues.

    Recorded 2 times across 2 separate inspections, most recently on October 6, 2026. For example: Did operator use good housekeeping practices ?

About this data

These results come from Peel Public Health (Region of Peel), which inspects food premises and other public facilities in this area. We republish the authority's public disclosure data and refresh it regularly; the official record is the final word.

6 inspections

  1. Required

    2 infractions

    • Did operator store food to prevent contamination and/or adulteration? (Significant Risk)
    • Did operator use good housekeeping practices ?
  2. Follow-up

    0 infractions

  3. Required

    4 infractions

    • Did operator store food to prevent contamination and/or adulteration? (Significant Risk)
    • Did operator provide a supply of potable hot and cold running water under pressure?
    • Did operator provide a test reagent to determine the concentration of sanitizer?
    • Did operator maintain non-food contact surfaces clean, sanitary and in good condition?
  4. Required

    3 infractions

    • Did operator store food to prevent contamination and/or adulteration? (Significant Risk)
    • Did operator properly maintain food contact surfaces?
    • Did operator maintain non-food contact surfaces clean, sanitary and in good condition?
  5. Required

    1 infraction

    • Did operator provide a test reagent to determine the concentration of sanitizer?
  6. Required

    2 infractions

    • Did operator maintain non-food contact surfaces clean, sanitary and in good condition?
    • Did operator take adequate measures to maintain food premises in a condition that prevent harbourage or breeding of pests? (Significant Risk)

Nearby inspected facilities

Own this business? Add a badge to your website