Bombay High Court

PATHAN MEDICAL AND STORES THR PATHAN AMJAD GULMOHAMAD KHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The suspension order dated 16 September 2026 is stayed for two weeks to enable the petitioner to obtain necessary orders from the appellate authority.

Summary

The petitioner, a licensed medical general store, was inspected and served a show‑cause notice for alleged violations, after which his licence was suspended effective 21 September 2026. He filed an appeal under Section 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, but the suspension took effect before he could obtain a stay. The petitioner sought interim protection to enable the appellate authority to consider his appeal. The State argued that the violations were serious and justified immediate suspension. The Court noted the statutory right to appeal and the 90‑day period to approach the appellate authority, finding that the immediate suspension deprived the petitioner of that right. Consequently, the Court stayed the suspension for two weeks to allow the appeal process to proceed, without deciding the merits of the violations. The writ petition was disposed with the interim relief granted.

Issues considered

Whether an interim order staying the suspension of a drug‑store licence can be granted pending appeal under Section 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
Whether the immediate effect of the suspension infringes the petitioner’s statutory right to a 90‑day period to approach the appellate authority.

Legislation cited

Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — s. 66(2)

Subjects

interim relief
license suspension
Drugs and Cosmetics Act
Section 66(2)
appeal
writ petition
administrative law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:42958


                                                    1                       923.odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 12730 OF 2026
                  PATHAN MEDICAL AND STORES THR PATHAN AMJAD
                                    GULMOHAMAD KHAN
                                              VERSUS
              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                                                 ...
                Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. R.P. Cheble and Ms. V.K. Khandelwal
                Addl. GP for Respondents : Ms. Dr. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar
                                                 …

                                       CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                                       DATE : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026


              PER COURT :

              1.           The Petitioner has approached this Court with a limited

              relief seeking protection by way of an interim order till his Appeal before

              the Appellate Authority is decided.

              2.           Learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that an

              inspection was conducted at the business premises of the Petitioner, who

              is running a medical general store under the license issued by the

              Competent Authority. Pursuant to the inspection a show cause notice was

              issued to him on 04.09.2026, through speed post bringing to his notice

              various deficiencies as recorded in the inspection report dated

              03.09.2026. The Petitioner was called upon to submit explanation for the

              same within a period of three days, failing which, appropriate action shall
                                    2                        923.odt


be taken by the Authority.

3.          According to the Petitioner, the said show cause notice was

issued by speed post and after receiving the show cause notice dated

04.09.2026, he has submitted his explanation on 11.09.2026, along with

necessary documents. After receiving the explanation by the Petitioner,

the order impugned dated 16.09.2026, was passed whereby the license of

the Petitioner has been suspended with effect from 21.09.2026, for a

period of 30 days i.e. up to 20.10.2026. It is submitted that although an

appellate remedy is provided under Section 66 (2) of the Drugs and

Cosmetics Act, 1940, the order of suspension of license has immediately

come into effect after issuance of the impugned order dated 16.09.2026,

within a period of 3 to 4 days. Therefore, the Petitioner did not have

sufficient time to approach the Appellate Authority to obtain necessary

orders. It is submitted that the Petitioner has already filed an Appeal

yesterday, therefore, considering that he has already approached the

Appellate Authority, he may be protected only for a limited period so as

to enable him, to obtain necessary orders from the Appellate Authority.

4.          The submission of the Petitioner is opposed by the learned

Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State Authority and

submits that considering the various violations and breaches of the

license conditions observed in the inspection report, the action has been
                                    3                         923.odt


taken by the licensing authority by suspending the license of the

Petitioner. The violations are serious, therefore, it was necessary to

suspend the license of the Petitioner. In view of the various breach

mentioned in the inspection report which has been produced in the

impugned order, the Petitioner does not deserve any protection.

5.          I have heard the respective parties.

6.          It is not in dispute that there is an appellate remedy provided

under Section 66 (2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and accordingly,

the Petitioner has already approached the Appellate Authority, by filing

an Appeal yesterday i.e. on 20.09.2026. The period provided for

approaching the Appellate Authority is 90 days, and the order impugned

has been given effect from 21.09.2026, which does not give the Petitioner

sufficient time to approach the authority. Even otherwise the impugned

order dated 16.09.2026, has been received by the Petitioner on 16th itself

by hand delivery and considering the urgency, he has moved this Court.

Therefore, without going into the merits of the matter, in my view, it

would be appropriate to grant protection for a limited period to the

Petitioner so as to enable him to obtain necessary orders from the

Appellate Authority.

7.          As a result, the order of suspension of license of the

Petitioner passed on 16.09.2026, shall stand suspended for the period of
                                       4                         923.odt


two weeks from the date of this order and the Competent Authority is

requested to consider the stay Application of Petitioner by passing

appropriate orders thereon. All the points and contentions of the

respective parties are kept open to be agitated in the pending appeal.

8.             With the aforementioned directions, Writ Petition is

disposed of.

9.             Learned Additional Government Pleader is requested to

communicate the order with the Competent Authority.

10.            Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this order.




                                       ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…