While directing the Food and Drug Administration Department, State of Maharashtra (Respondents) to forthwith revoke the suspension of the Park INN by Radisson (Petitioner’s) FSSAI Licence and restore the same, allowing the Petitioner to carry on its business activities, the Bombay High Court has clarified that suspension of a food business licence under the proviso to Section 32(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is preventive in nature, and its purpose is to safeguard public health until the identified deficiencies are rectified.
Once it is demonstrated through an independent inspection that the establishment has substantially remedied the deficiencies and attained a high level of compliance (95% in this case), the continuance of the suspension order ceases to serve the purpose for which it was originally imposed. A solitary adverse finding, such as the presence of two insects, does not justify continued suspension when the overall assessment records the establishment as ‘Compliant/Satisfactory’, asserted the Court.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad found that a second inspection report shown the presence of two insects in the dish-washing and sweet section of the kitchen premises, thereby indicating that the deficiencies were not completely rectified. The Court observed that the very object of suspension under the proviso to Section 32(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, is preventive in nature, namely, to safeguard public health until the identified deficiencies are rectified. Once it is demonstrated, on the basis of an independent inspection conducted pursuant to the orders of the Court, that the establishment has substantially remedied the deficiencies and has attained 95% compliance, the continuance of the suspension order ceases to serve the purpose for which it was originally imposed.
The Court further observed that the solitary finding regarding the presence of two insects, when viewed in the context of the overall inspection report recording the establishment as ‘Compliant/Satisfactory’, does not justify the continued suspension of the Petitioner’s licence. The Court accepted the statements and undertakings of the Petitioner that it shall continue to maintain the highest standards of hygiene and sanitation and shall ensure strict compliance with the provisions of the Act, the Rules, the applicable Regulations, and the conditions of its licence in relation to the storage, preparation, and service of food.
At the same time, the Court expressly declined to adjudicate the larger question canvassed by the Petitioner regarding the scope and ambit of the power under the proviso to Section 32(3), including whether an improvement notice is an indispensable pre-condition before directing immediate suspension.
Briefly, the Petitioner, Sanjay Baburao Nirbhavne, is the Senior Manager of M/s. Lotus Pond Hotel Pvt Ltd., which operates a hotel establishment under the name ‘Park INN by Radisson’. The establishment holds a valid licence under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which remains valid until 7th March 2031. On 2nd July 2026, Food Safety Officer, Thane Zone-02 (Respondent No.5) conducted a surprise inspection of the Petitioner’s establishment. The inspection revealed several deficiencies and instances of non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, the Rules, and the conditions of the licence.
On the following day, i.e., 3rd July 2026, Respondent No.3 (Joint Commissioner, Konkan Division), invoking the proviso to Section 32(3) of the Act read with Regulation 2.1.8(iv) of the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulations, 2011, passed an order suspending the Petitioner’s licence with immediate effect. The order directed the Petitioner to forthwith cease and desist from carrying out any food business activity. The Petitioner challenged this suspension order.
