Bombay High Court Stays Multiple FDA Licence Suspensions Over Due Process Concerns

The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) recent crackdown on restaurants and food establishments has come under judicial scrutiny, with the Bombay High Court questioning the regulator's practice of ordering immediate closures without following the due process prescribed under law. The court observed that authorities cannot adopt a "shoot first and then ask questions" approach and reiterated that emergency powers under the Food Safety and Standards Act should only be exercised when there is a genuine and demonstrable threat to public health.

Over the past month, benches of the Bombay High Court in Mumbai, Nagpur and Aurangabad have stayed or set aside licence suspension orders in at least nine cases involving dairies, milk vendors, a four-star hotel and a well-known restaurant in Mumbai's Fort area. The rulings have centred on whether the Maharashtra FDA, led by Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe, properly justified invoking immediate licence suspensions instead of first allowing businesses an opportunity to address deficiencies identified during inspections.

The dispute revolves around Section 32 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, which requires food business operators to receive an improvement notice detailing deficiencies and granting at least 14 days to rectify them before a licence can be suspended. The law permits immediate suspension only in exceptional situations where public health is at imminent risk, provided the authority records specific reasons in writing. The High Court has repeatedly stressed that this extraordinary power cannot be used for routine hygiene or infrastructure-related shortcomings.

Also Read: Tukaram Mundhe Defends FDA Action Against Restaurants Over Hygiene Violations

The FDA has defended its enforcement campaign, stating that surprise inspections revealed significant lapses in hygiene, food storage and sanitation at several establishments. The regulator also maintained that the inspections were conducted uniformly across both private businesses and government-operated canteens. According to the FDA, the drive is aimed at improving food safety standards and ensuring compliance with statutory regulations across the state.

However, the High Court has found that several closures lacked sufficient legal justification. In one case involving an 80-year-old dairy in Wardha, the Nagpur bench ruled that only one food item posed a potential health risk, while issues such as slippery floors and storage deficiencies did not warrant shutting down the entire business. In separate cases, the Aurangabad bench held that broken tiles and open drainage chambers should have resulted in improvement notices rather than immediate licence suspensions. A Navi Mumbai four-star hotel also secured relief after a court-appointed inspection found that most deficiencies had already been rectified.

The court's strongest observations came during proceedings involving Poornima Restaurant in South Mumbai, where judges emphasised that food safety laws must be enforced equally for private establishments and government-run facilities. While acknowledging the FDA's objective of strengthening food safety, the Bombay High Court reiterated that regulatory authorities must act within the framework of the law, ensure procedural fairness and adopt proportionate measures. The rulings reinforce that public health enforcement must balance consumer safety with statutory safeguards and principles of natural justice.

Also Read: Know Your Rights: Maharashtra Eateries Can No Longer Force You To Buy Bottled Water