CAMLIN FINE SCIENCES LIMITED THR. AUTHO. SIG. RAHUL SAWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF MINISTRY OF FOOD AND DRUG ADM. AND ORS

                                                                        911 WP-13278-26.DOC

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 13278 OF 2026


                   Camlin Fine Sciences Ltd.                              ...Petitioner

                           Versus

                   The State of Maharashtra & ors.                    …Respondents


                   Mr. Birendra Saraf, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Kushal Amin,
                        Ms. Alisha D’Souza, Mr. Abhinav Naiknaware, Ms.
                        Sulagna Mohanty, i/b AAK Legal, for the Petitioner.

                   Mr. P P Kakade, Addl. G P (VC), a/w Mr. Sandip Babar, for
                         Respondents - State.


                                               CORAM :       N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                               DATE    :     07th OCTOBER 2026

SAINATH
SANJAY
BODKHE             P.C.:
Digitally signed
by SAINATH
SANJAY BODKHE
Date: 2026.10.07
20:30:56 +0530


                   1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

                   2.      The petitioner was constrained to institute this petition as

                   the Appeal No. 538/2026 preferred by the petitioner alongwith

                   an application seeking stay to the execution and operation of

                   the order dated 09th July, 2026 thereby cancelling the licence of

                   the petitioner under Section 2 of the Poisons Act, 1919, and

                   Rule 7 of the Maharashtra Poisons Rules, 1972, w.e.f. 08 th

                   October, 2026, has not been heard.




                   SAINATH, PA                         1/3
                                                  911 WP-13278-26.DOC

3.      In view of the aforesaid nature of the challenge, Mr.

Kakade, the learned AGP, was directed to take instructions.

4.      Today, Mr. Kakade, makes a statement that, the stay

application would be decided tomorrow.

5.      The material on record indicates that, the petitioner had

preferred an appeal against the order of cancellation of licence

on 17th August, 2026.

6.      Having regard to the date from which the cancellation was

to become effective, the State Government ought to have decided

the stay application expeditiously so that the petitioner could

avail appropriate remedies in the event an adverse order was

passed against the petitioner. The statement on behalf of the

State Government that, the stay application would be decided

tomorrow, does not alleviate the situation as the impugned order

would become effective on 08th October, 2026, itself. In the event

the State Government decides to reject the stay application, the

petitioner would be left in the lurch.

7.      In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered

view that, now the appeal itself should be finally decided by the

State Government expeditiously.




SAINATH, PA                        2/3
                                                    911 WP-13278-26.DOC

8.      The Writ Petition, thus, stands disposed with a direction to

the State Government to decide the Appeal No. 538/2026

preferred by the petitioner finally, within a period of four weeks.

9.      The petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Authority

tomorrow.

10.     Till the final decision of the appeal, the impugned order

dated 09th July 2026 shall not come into effect.

11.     In the event the appeal is decided against the petitioner,

the stay shall continue to operate for a further period of one

week from the date of such order.



                                          [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




SAINATH, PA                         3/3