Mumbai, India – The Bombay High Court on Saturday, August 29, 2026, strongly criticized the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its "pedantic" approach and "undue haste," clearing the way for five eateries at the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) premises in Bandra-Kurla Complex to reopen. A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad vacated the FDA's suspension orders, questioning the regulator's rigid stance despite a fresh inspection showing high compliance.
Court Slams FDA's "Rigid" Approach
The High Court expressed severe displeasure with the FDA's conduct, particularly its refusal to lift the suspension even after a re-inspection found the restaurants largely compliant. "Do you feel you are a lord and you can do anything?" the court asked, directly challenging the FDA's authority and methods. Acting Chief Justice Ghuge stated that the bench was "tired of scolding the department and officers" and warned of potential contempt action against officials for disobeying previous court directions to adopt a pragmatic view. The judges emphasized that regulatory powers must be exercised judiciously and with a balanced perspective.[timesofindia+6]
Initial Closures Over Hygiene and Contract Issues
The FDA had initially suspended the licenses of the five eateries on August 22, 2026, following an inspection conducted on August 20. This inspection reportedly uncovered several hygiene violations, including cockroach and fly infestations, dirty kitchens, slippery floors, spoiled vegetables, and employees not adhering to cleanliness standards. Beyond hygiene, a significant issue for the FDA was the operational arrangement: the eateries were run by M/s Shirke Infrastructure, but their licenses were registered in the name of the MCA. The FDA considered this an irregularity.[etvbharat+2]
Fresh Inspection Shows High Compliance
After the initial suspension, the MCA moved the High Court to challenge the FDA's decision. The court then directed a fresh inspection of the premises. This subsequent inspection, conducted on Thursday, August 27, 2026, found the eateries to be 88 percent compliant with food safety requirements. Despite this improved compliance, the FDA initially maintained the suspension, primarily citing the contractual arrangement where a third party operated the restaurants under the MCA's license. The High Court, however, observed that no provision in the law prohibits such an arrangement, dismissing the FDA's continued objection.[lokmattimes+8]
FDA Agrees to Reopen and Reconsider
Faced with the High Court's strong remarks and the threat of "stinging orders," Additional Government Pleader P.P. Kakade, representing the FDA, informed the bench that the department would withdraw its suspension orders. The FDA agreed to issue a fresh notice to the MCA and provide the association with an opportunity for a formal hearing regarding its contractual agreement with Shirke Infrastructure. Accepting this undertaking, the court disposed of the petitions, allowing the five eateries to resume operations immediately, noting that they had now met most food safety requirements.[lokmattimes+13]
Pattern of Court Criticism Against FDA
This ruling is not an isolated incident but part of a series of instances where the Bombay High Court has pulled up the Maharashtra FDA for its regulatory actions. Over recent months, the court has consistently questioned the FDA's methods, often using phrases like "going overboard" and warning against a "shoot first and ask questions later" approach. For example, on August 18, 2026, the court ordered the FDA to pay 5 lakh rupees in compensation to a Pune sweets shop, Gurunanak Dairy and Sweets, for keeping its license suspended despite a re-inspection showing 98 percent compliance. The court called the FDA's policy of suspending licenses "strange and perverse" in that case.[indianexpress+6]
Earlier in August, the court also criticized the FDA for its "high-handed" and "drastic" action against pharmaceutical company Cipla, which involved cancelling drug sale licenses for a Pune unit without following due process. The court questioned why a hearing notice was issued on a state holiday when the FDA's office was closed, deeming it unfair and lacking transparency. Similarly, in a case involving Poornima Restaurant, the court converted a suspension notice into an "improvement notice," highlighting discrepancies in inspection reports between private eateries and government canteens. The court has consistently stressed that the law must be enforced impartially, with no exceptions for VVIP establishments. Even the complete stoppage of Johnson's Baby Powder production was quashed by the High Court due to violations of natural justice, as test reports were not provided and no proper hearing was afforded to the manufacturer. These repeated interventions underscore the judiciary's commitment to ensuring regulatory bodies adhere to legal procedures and principles of natural justice.[ndtv+13]
Impact on Regulatory Practices
The Bombay High Court's consistent admonishments send a clear message to the FDA regarding the need for a more pragmatic and legally sound approach to enforcement. The rulings emphasize that while the FDA's intent to ensure food and drug safety is laudable, its actions must always align with due process and fairness. This series of judicial interventions is likely to prompt the FDA to review its operational protocols, encouraging a shift from rigid interpretations to more balanced decision-making that considers the full context of each case and provides businesses with adequate opportunity to address concerns.[ndtv+4]
This latest ruling serves as a vital reminder that regulatory zeal must be tempered with adherence to legal principles and a fair hearing for all parties involved.
