In a stern rebuke of the Maharashtra Food and Drugs Administration (FDA), the Bombay High Court forced the regulatory body to reverse two major enforcement actions after accusing it of acting with “undue haste” and violating the principles of natural justice. A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad issued sharp criticisms against the agency’s recent conduct, openly questioning its methodology by asking, “Do you feel you are a Lord and you can do anything?”
The court’s intervention addressed two separate enforcement controversies managed by the FDA. The first involved the suspension of operations for five restaurants operating within the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) premises in Bandra-Kurla Complex. Although a follow-up inspection revealed that the eateries were 88 per cent compliant with food safety standards, the FDA had maintained the suspensions because the facilities were managed by a third party, M/s Shirke Infrastructure, rather than the primary licence holder, MCA.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The High Court noted that no legal provision explicitly prohibited such operational arrangements. Expressing frustration over the department’s failure to adopt a pragmatic approach despite prior directions, the bench warned officials of potential contempt proceedings and imprisonment if they failed to comply with proper legal reasoning. Following the court’s stern warning, the FDA agreed to withdraw the suspension order, clear the eateries for reopening, and issue a fresh notice to conduct a proper hearing regarding the contractual relationship between MCA and Shirke Infrastructure.
The second major setback for the regulator pertained to Cipla Pharma and Life Sciences Limited. The FDA had cancelled the drug sale licence for Cipla’s carrying and forwarding unit at Wadki in Pune following an investigation into the recall and packaging of Reactin Plus tablets. The High Court identified severe procedural flaws in the FDA’s handling of the case, specifically pointing out that the regulator had scheduled a hearing for a company representative on a state-declared public holiday.
Describing the FDA’s actions as “high-handed” and going “overboard,” the bench emphasized that while the agency’s broader mission remains laudable, it cannot bypass standard legal procedure or basic principles of natural justice. Consequently, the FDA withdrew its cancellation order regarding the Pune facility.
Throughout the proceedings, the bench reiterated that regulatory authorities must balance enforcement with fairness, cautioning against excessive measures and urging the department to avoid acting with arbitrary haste in future regulatory matters.
