Torturing citizens: Bombay HC orders FDA to pay ₹5 lakh for refusing to allow reopening of sweet shop

“This is plain and simple perversity. Once you clear 98%, you say, now, go and file an appeal. What is this? Torturing citizens,” the court said.
Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court
Published on
2 min read

The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the Maharashtra Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) to pay ₹5 lakh in compensation to a Pune-based sweets retailer for keeping its business suspended despite a 98% hygiene compliance report [Gurunanak Dairy Sweets v. Union of India & Ors.]

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad set aside the FDA's suspension order and permitted Gurunanak Dairy and Sweets to restart its operations.

Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad
Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad

The Bench also came down heavily on the FDA for "torturing citizens". 

It noted that a pending appeal against the suspension order before an appellate authority was a "lame excuse" for failing to restore the licence promptly.

The Court held that a pending appeal was no bar to re-inspection and immediate revocation.

"This is plain and simple perversity. Absolute strange policies. Least said, the better. Once you clear with 98%, you say, now, go and file an appeal. What is this? Torturing citizens," the Court stated.

Once you clear with 98%, you say, now, go and file an appeal. What is this? Torturing citizens.
Bombay High Court

The FDA suspended the shop's food licence on June 12 following a food poisoning complaint and sanitation concerns.

The retailer challenged the order before the FDA Commissioner on June 15 and submitted a compliance report on July 9. 

A re-inspection by an FDA officer on July 13 generated an automated score of 35 out of 36 marks (98% compliance).

However, the authority refused to restore the licence, forcing the petitioner to approach the High Court.

Advocate Abhijeet Desai, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the 34-day closure caused a direct revenue loss of ₹8.74 lakh despite satisfactory re-inspection results.

The counsel for the FDA defended the delay, arguing that the pending appeal had already been heard and closed for judgment on August 11.

The Court observed that the FDA was going overboard. 

"Your intention is laudable, but you are going overboard. You should have immediately revoked the suspension of the licence once you noticed 98% compliance," the Bench remarked.

It held the FDA accountable for business losses and directed them to deposit the ₹5 lakh compensation within 30 days.

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com