APNA CHEMIST Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three petitions raise common issue of law and facts and can be conveniently disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners are in the business of sale of medicines. They are running medical stores for which they have obtained licences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. The case of the petitioners is that an inspection of their medical stores was undertaken by respondent no. 1, in pursuance of which the petitioners have been issued orders whereby the petitioners licences to conduct business in medicines, stand suspended for a particular period. Illustratively, in the first petition (i.e. Writ Petition No. 305 of 2024), licence has been suspended for the period from 8/1/2024 to 17/1/2024 by an order dtd. 3/10/2023.

(3.) It is a common contention as urged on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have already availed of an appellate remedy as available to them under Rule 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 by preferring an appeal before the State Government. A copy of the appeal is also annexed to the petitions. Learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 305 of 2024 has drawn our attention to the order dtd. 3/10/2023 suspending the petitioners license and to a copy of the appeal annexed to the petition, which was filed on 31/10/2023. Similarly, in the companion matters, appeals have been filed within the prescribed limitation and in fact well in advance, so that the adjudication on the appeals takes place before the period of suspension approaches.