Back
Directs Maharashtra to Revoke After Compliance
In a significant ruling that curbs , the has directed the () to automatically revoke licence suspensions once an establishment rectifies identified deficiencies. The division bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad, warned against forcing businesses to approach court for relief after compliance, terming such litigation "".
The order came while hearing a petition filed by , a milk procurement and storage unit based in Ambegaon, Pune district. The had suspended its licence on , citing non-compliance with food safety regulations. After the petitioner claimed to have rectified the deficiencies, a re-inspection on found some issues still unresolved. then sought a fresh inspection and court intervention.
Arguments on Both Sides
opposed the petition, arguing that the re-inspection confirmed continuing deficiencies, warranting the suspension. countered that all pointed-out deficiencies had since been addressed, and a fresh inspection would demonstrate full compliance.
Court's Observations on Bureaucratic Inaction
The High Court noted a troubling pattern in multiple matters: even after establishments fully comply, the
fails to revoke suspension or cancellation orders.
"We have noticed in several matters listed before us, that even after an establishment has duly complied with the deficiencies pointed out by the Respondents, the suspension or cancellation order is not revoked,"
the judges observed.
Emphasising the harsh consequences, the court added:
"The result of such inaction is extremely serious, as the establishment is prevented from carrying on its business. This causes financial loss to the establishment and has a
on its employees and supply chains."
The bench further stated there could be
"no justification for requiring an establishment to approach this Court merely to secure revocation of an order which has ceased to have any efficacy."
Referring to a previous case—
—where compensatory costs of ₹5 lakh were imposed, the court made clear that
"an establishment which has cured the deficiencies cannot be penalised further due to the inaction of the Respondents."
Landmark Direction on
To prevent recurrence and ensure the regulatory mechanism operates fairly, the court directed that in all such cases, once the
is satisfied through an
that deficiencies have been rectified, the authority
"shall forthwith revoke the suspension or cancellation order."
The same principle was applied to
's case: the
shall stand automatically revoked upon issuance of the
, without requiring the petitioner to approach court again.
Fresh Inspection Ordered
The court directed respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to conduct a fresh inspection of 's establishment on , between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. and prepare an auto-generated . The petition is listed for further directions on .
The ruling effectively relieves businesses from the burden of additional litigation and sets a clear expectation that regulatory authorities must act promptly once compliance is demonstrated.
