According to Business Today, the Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) to pay a Pune-based dairy and sweets retailer Rs 5 lakh towards "losses" for not revoking the suspension of its food licence despite 98% compliance. Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad vacated the June 12 suspension order "forthwith" and granted M/s Gurunanak Dairy and Sweets "liberty to restart retail business in dairy and sweets."
What the court ordered
According to Business Today, the court directed FDA to pay Rs 5 lakh as "compensation for losses" after finding that the petitioner scoring 98% compliance "should have fetched an order of instant revocation" of the suspension. The judges observed that FDA's compliance report covered cleanliness, hygiene, maintenance and sanitation, in which the retailer had scored 98%. The court also directed that FDA deposit the amount in court within 30 days and allowed the petitioner liberty to withdraw the amount.
The judges dismissed the State's argument that the petitioner's appeal was pending before the FDA commissioner, terming the submission "unconvincing." Business Today reported that the judges said pendency of the appeal was not an impediment to revoking the retailer's licence and called the State's position "plain and simple perversity" and a "strange" policy.
Timeline: suspension, inspection and appeal
The Wadgaon Sheri-based retailer's licence was suspended after an incident of food poisoning on June 12. According to the petition, on June 12 the FDA suspended the food licence and directed closure of the business without an improvement notice or a hearing. On July 13, a re-inspection by the Food Safety Officer recorded 98% compliance, yet the suspension order remained in force. A July 15 appeal to the FDA commissioner was not decided, prompting the retailer to approach the High Court.
| Date | Event | Compliance level |
|---|---|---|
| June 12 | FDA suspended food licence and directed closure; no improvement notice or hearing | — |
| July 13 | Re-inspection by Food Safety Officer | 98% compliance |
| July 15 | Appeal filed before FDA commissioner | — |
| July 16 | Bombay HC ruled in the Pind Punjab case that suspension became void after fresh inspection | 100% compliance |
| August 11 | State said appeal was closed for order before the commissioner | — |
The retailer's advocate, Abhijeet Desai, submitted that despite all lacunae being removed and compliance carried out, the suspension order was not revoked. He cited the similar case of another Pune establishment, Pind Punjab, where the High Court on July 16 ruled that the previous suspending order became void after a fresh inspection confirmed 100% compliance with safety norms.
Penalties, compensation and court remarks
During the hearing, the judges asked Desai about the shop's daily earnings; he replied approximately Rs 25,000 per day and said that from the date of compliance, 34 days had passed, resulting in a loss of Rs 8.5 lakh. Business Today reported the judges had previously observed that FDA's intention is "laudable" and that "some department has at least stood up." However, Justice Ghuge told the FDA: "But you are going overboard. You should have immediately revoked the suspension of the licence once you noticed 98% compliance."
The court also questioned the FDA's approach:
"The petitioner scoring 98% compliance should have fetched an order of instant revocation of the suspension order. The lame excuse that an appeal is pending should not have been put forth."
As Business Today reported, Justice Ghuge asked: "What is this? Torturing citizens." The court directed FDA to deposit Rs 5 lakh in court within 30 days, with the retailer permitted to withdraw the amount.
Compliance obligations and deadlines for FDA
Based on the order reported by Business Today, FDA must:
- Pay Rs 5 lakh as compensation for losses to M/s Gurunanak Dairy and Sweets.
- Deposit the amount in court within 30 days of the order.
- Allow the petitioner liberty to withdraw the amount.
- Vacate the June 12 suspension order forthwith, permitting the retailer to restart its retail business in dairy and sweets.
For licence-holders, the ruling records that a 98% compliance score in a fresh inspection should result in immediate revocation of a suspension, and that a pending appeal does not justify continuing a suspension after compliance has been documented. The judges, according to Business Today, found the State's submission "unconvincing" and described the continued suspension as "plain and simple perversity."
Sources:
