Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

NAFIS KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is dismissed because the petitioner failed to file an application as required under Section 31(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Summary

The petitioner, Nafis Khan, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to grant him permission to sell packed meat of male buffalo from his shop and to consider his applications dated 21‑02‑2026 and 17‑04‑2026. The relief was premised on the requirement under Section 31(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which mandates filing an application with specified particulars and fees before the designated officer. The Court observed that the petitioner had not filed any such application complying with Section 31(3). Consequently, the Court declined to grant the relief, noting that without a compliant application the competent authority could not be compelled to act. The Court, however, directed that if the petitioner files the required application, the authority must decide it expeditiously. The writ petition was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner complied with the procedural requirement of filing an application under Section 31(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
  • Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued against the respondents in the absence of a compliant application.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Food Safety
  • Section 31(3)
  • Mandamus
  • Writ Petition
  • Permission to Sell Meat
  • Procedural Compliance
  • High Court

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                         WRIT - C No. - 17561 of 2026

Nafis Khan
                                                                       .....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
                                                                     .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                :   Suresh Singh Tomer
Counsel for Respondent(s)                :   C.S.C., Madan Mohan Srivastava

Court No. - 40
                    HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
                    HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the
following relief:-

     "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
     the respondent no.4 & 5 to grant permission to the petitioner for selling
     the packed meet of male buffalo (भैंसा) from his shop situated in Naya
     Nagar Pratham, Tehsil Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi after obtaining
     the same from Sarkari Support Unnao Slaughter House, District Unnao
     within a short stipulated period, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
     and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

     ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
     respondent no.4 & 5 to consider and decide the applications dated
     21.02.2026 and 17.04.2026 (Annexure No.2 & 3 to the writ petition)
     within a short stipulated period which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
     and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

     iii. Issue any other writ, order or direction in any other suitable nature
     which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and
     circumstances of the case.

     iv. Award the cost of the instant writ petition in favour of the petitioner."

3. Section 31(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (hereinafter
referred to as 'Act, 2006') provides that an application has to be submitted in
the manner containing such particulars and fees as may be specified by
regulations before the designated officer.
                                                                                             WRIC No. 17561 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    4. We do not find from the record that any such application has been filed by
                                    the petitioner complying with the requirement of Section 31(3) of the Act,
                                    2006.

                                    5. In such view of the fact, we are not inclined to grant the relief prayed for
                                    by the petitioner.

                                    6. However, in case petitioner submits an application in accordance with the
                                    procedure contemplated under Section 31(3) of the Act, 2006 before the
                                    Competent Authority, it is expected from the Competent Authority to decide
                                    the same expeditiously in accordance with law.

                                    7. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is
                                    dismissed.

                                    May 5, 2026
                                    Sattyarth
                                                                   (Garima Prashad,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SATTYARTH ANAND
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.