Patna High Court
M/S New Maa Bhawani Pharma, Proprietor ... vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 29 March, 2018
Author: Vikash Jain
Bench: Vikash Jain
Patna High Court CWJC No.4520 of 2018 dt.29-03-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4520 of 2018
===========================================================
M/s New Maa Bhawani Pharma, Proprietor Shayam Sunder Barnwal, S/o Late
Seo Shankar Barnwal, premises situated at 1st Floor, Uday Place, G.M. Road,
Patna, R/o White House Building No. 18 Hanuman Nagar, P.S. Patrakar Nagar
Kankarbag Sampatchak, Lohianagar, District Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Health Department,
Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
2. The State Drug Controller-Cum- Chief Licensing Authority, New Secretariat,
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Assistant Drug Controller, Drug Control Administration, Patna, 4th
Floor, N.M.C.H., Campus, Kankarbagh, Patna- 20.
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Shankar Das,Advocate
Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Birju Prasad -GP13
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 29-03-2018 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.02.2018 as contained in Memo No. 101 passed by the Respondent no. 3, the Assistant Drug Controller, Drug Control Administration, Patna, 4th Floor, N.M.C.H., Campus, Kankarbagh, Patna 20 by which the drug licence of the petitioner's medicinal shop has been cancelled; and for connected reliefs.
3. At the very outset, while disputing the validity of the impugned order cancelling the petitioner's drug licence, it is stated that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal against such order of cancellation, which is pending.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4520 of 2018 dt.29-03-2018
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner seeks stay of the impugned order of cancellation and has specifically stated that the seized goods comprising of expired and unexpired medicines have been taken away by the raiding party.
5. Considering that an appeal has already been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order of cancellation, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the matter. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with an observation that the Appellate Authority would consider and dispose of the same, if still pending, on its own merits and in accordance with law expeditiously.
6. In view of the stock of the expired medicines having already been seized and kept in custody, there appears little reason to prevent the petitioner from dealing with the stock of other unexpired standard quality medicines in the meantime, which otherwis e would also stand risk of expiry and would be contrary to public interest. The impugned order of cancellation shall accordingly remain in abeyance in respect of the unexpired medicines lying in the stock of the petitioner, until disposal of the appeal as aforesaid.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran/BT
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading 04.04.2018
Date
Transmission NA
Date