FSSAI License Cannot Be Kept Under Continued Suspension Post-Compliance Unless Exceptional Risk To Public Health Exists: Bombay High Court
|The Court held that rectification of deficiencies to exemplar level warrants revocation of suspension; penalties for unlicensed product sales or suspension period operations must be pursued separately under Sections 55 and 63 Of Food Safety Act.
The Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Bench, has held that the continued suspension of a food business operator’s FSSAI license is unsustainable once the identified deficiencies are rectified to a satisfactory compliance level, unless the non-compliances pose an immediate and exceptional threat to public health under Section 32 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The Court clarified that statutory suspension under the proviso to Section 32(3) of the Act is an emergency measure meant strictly to safeguard public health, and cannot be extended indefinitely as a punitive measure when a re-inspection confirms high compliance. Breaches such as selling product categories not endorsed on the license or operating during a suspension period invite distinct penal consequences under Sections 55 and 63 of the Act rather than justification for prolonged license suspension.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh and Justice Neeraj P. Dhote observed, “The object of suspension of license as mandated by the proviso to Sub-Section (3) of Section 32 of the Food Safety Act is to protect the public health. The suspension of license for non compliances, which have the propensity to harm public health, cannot be continued infinitely. The consequence of compliance of the deficiencies should, in our view, result in revocation of the suspension of license and continued monitoring as mandated by law to ensure statutory compliances. The establishment cannot be put under suspension even after obtaining ‘exemplar’ compliance. The suspension order has been continued by appellate authority on grounds which are unsustainable in so far as harm to public health is concerned”.
Advocate Mayur Khandeparkar appeared for the petitioner and T. J. Kapre, AGP appeared for the respondent.
The Bench hearing a writ petition filed by a Karad-based establishment, Hotel Alankar, through its sole proprietor Dipak Sopanrao Arbune, challenging the appellate authority's order upholding its license suspension.
The Petitioner held a valid FSSAI license granted in July 2022 and valid until July 2027. On July 7, 2026, the Food Safety Officer conducted a surprise inspection, citing multiple non-compliances, including the unendorsed sale of beverages, improper food segregation, and unsafe cooking oil, leading to an immediate suspension order on July 8, 2026, under Section 32(3).
During the pendency of the statutory appeal, a re-inspection conducted on July 31, 2026, awarded the establishment a score of 106 out of 110 (97%), falling under the "exemplar" compliance category. Despite this report, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal on August 19, 2026, citing unauthorized operations during suspension and lack of proprietor knowledge regarding Schedule-IV standards.
The Petitioner subsequently amended the writ petition before the High Court to challenge both the original suspension order and the Appellate Authority's dismissal order.
Quashing the appellate order, the High Court observed, “The statutory scheme of Section 32 of the Food Safety Act enjoins issuance of improvement notice for non compliance of any regulations and, upon failure, to suspend the license. The continued non compliance may be met with a show-cause notice and thereafter cancellation of license. It is only in case of harm to public health that the license may be suspended forthwith. The re-verification was conducted at the directions of the Commissioner of Food Safety. The purpose is to verify the compliances set out in the inspection report leading to suspension. The non consideration of the re-verification report makes the whole exercise of re-verification futile. The continued suspension, if any, can be ordered only on consideration of the re-verification report and on finding of continued non compliance”.
The Bench noted that the Appellate Authority completely disregarded the official 97% exemplar score recorded in the re-verification report on subjective grounds such as the proprietor's oral knowledge of regulations, a course "unknown to law." Relying on judicial precedent, the Court held that secondary licensing breaches do not constitute exceptional public health emergencies.
“It is difficult to accept that the sale of food product categories not covered by the license, by itself, would constitute harm to public health. It is pleaded that due to suspension, the online portal is locked and Petitioner cannot apply for modification of license. It is for this reason that the re-inspection report shows non compliance of updated FSSAI license. In any event, Section 63 of Food Safety Act prescribes penalty for carrying on business without license. It was open for the concerned authority to pass an order of penalty for such violation, however, the continued suspension is unwarranted”, it said.
The High Court quashed the appellate order dated August 19, 2026, revoked the suspension order dated July 8, 2026, and restored the Petitioner's FSSAI license and directed the proprietor to submit an undertaking within seven days affirming that food products not endorsed on the license will not be sold.
Cause Title: Hotel Alankar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026:BHC-KOL:8650-DB)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Mayur Khandeparkar, Shubhra Swami, Meghna Vijan, Rohini i/b Abhay Bichakar, Advocates.
Respondent: T. J. Kapre, AGP, Rakesh Bhatkar, Advocates.