M/S PATEL MEDI TRADE vs THE ASSISTANT DRUGS CONTROLLER AND LICENSING AUTHORITY
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 30641 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S PATEL MEDI TRADE
REGISTERED UNDER THE DRUGS
AND COSMETICS ACT, 1940 AND
THE RULES MADE THEREUNDER
REG. OFFICE AT PID NO. 162/162,
1ST FLOOR, JAYANAGAR, HBCS BDA
1ST STAGE, GUBBALALA
BENGALURU - 560061
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SMT. LEELA PATEL
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
W/O SRI TULASARAM
…PETITIONER
(BY MS. S.M. ASHA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR B T.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT DRUGS CONTROLLER AND
LICENSING AUTHORITY
BENGALURU VRUTHA - 2, PALACE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD SAFETY AND
DRUGS ADMINISTRATION
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
BENGALURU - 560001.
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA K S, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
PASSED DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 19.09.2026,, RESPONDENT NO.1, WHEREBY THE
PETITIONER'S DRUG LICENCES BEARING NOS. 20B-KA-B22-
251265 AND 21B-KA-B22-251266 HAVE BEEN CANCELLED,
PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed seeking for the following
reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned order
dated 19.09.2026, bearing Ref. No. -
D¸ÀÄOD/¸ÀO¤PÀ/¨ÉA.ªÀÈ
2/268/26-27, passed by Respondent No.1, whereby the
Petitioner's Drug Licences bearing Nos. 20B-KA-B22-
251265 and 21B-KA-B22-251266 have been cancelled,
produced as ANNEXURE-B;
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
b) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents
to restore/reinstate the Petitioner's Drug Licences
bearing Nos. 20B-KA-B22-251265 and 21B-KA-B22-
251266 and permit the Petitioner to carry on its licensed
wholesale pharmaceutical business in accordance with
law;
c) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case,
in the interest of justice and equity. "
2. The petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated
19.09.2026 (Annexure - B to the writ petition) passed under
1
Section 66(1) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 by
respondent No.1 - The Assistant Drugs Controller and Licensing
Authority, Bengaluru, whereunder the license of the petitioner
who is a distributor of pharmaceutical products has been
cancelled.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has carried
on business in the purchase and sale of 'Zavicefta 2.5 gms
Injection' and 'Emblaveo Injection' which have been stated to
be a spurious drug.
4. In this context, a perusal of the impugned order dated
19.09.2026 would indicate that the petitioner has been issued
1
Hereinafter referred to as 'Rules'
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
with a notice dated 03.09.2026 as well as a show cause notice
dated 16.09.2026. However, there is no averment in the writ
petition regarding the petitioner having been received any
notice from the respondent/s.
5. Be that as it may, it is forthcoming from the impugned
order dated 19.09.2026 that the same has been issued under
Rule 66(1) of the Rules.
6. It is relevant to note Rule 66 of the Rules, which reads
as under:
66. Cancellation and suspension of
licences. - (1) The Licensing Authority may, after
giving the licensee an opportunity to show cause
why such an order should not be passed by an
order in writing stating the reasons therefor, cancel
a licence issued under this Part or suspend it for
such period as he thinks fit, either wholly or in
respect of some of the substances to which it
relates, if in his opinion, the licensee has failed to
comply with any of the conditions of the licence or
with any provisions of the Act or Rules thereunder:
[Provided that, where such failure or
contravention is the consequence of an act or
omission on the part of an agent or employee, the
licence shall not be cancelled or suspended if the
licensee proves to the satisfaction of the licensing
authority−
(a) that the act or omission was not
instigated or connived at by him or, if the
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
licensee is a firm or company, by a partner of
the firm or a director of the company, or
(b) that he or his agent or employee had not
been guilty of any similar act or omission
within twelve months before the date on
which the act or omission in question took
place, or where his agent or employee had
been guilty of any such act or omission the
licensee had not or could not reasonably
have had, knowledge of that previous act or
omission, or
(c) if the act or omission was a continuing act
or omission, he had not or could not
reasonably have had knowledge of that
previous act or omission, or
(d) that he had used due diligence to ensure
that the conditions of the licence or the
provisions of the Act or the Rules thereunder
were observed.
(2) A licensee whose licence has been suspended or
cancelled may, within three months of the date of
order under sub-rule (1), prefer an appeal against
that order to the State Government, which shall
decide the same.]"
7. A plain reading of sub-rule (1) of Rule 66 of the Rules,
clearly indicates that the petitioner is entitled to be given a
show cause notice before an order of either suspension or
cancellation is passed.
8. It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner
did not have an adequate opportunity of hearing. It is further
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
contended that merely on the allegation of the petitioner
having dealt with a spurious drug, the license of the petitioner
itself has been cancelled.
9. It is further relevant to note that by virtue of sub-rule (1)
of Rule 66 of the Rules, the license of the petitioner could be
suspended or cancelled either in whole or part. The said aspect
of the matter is also required to be taken into account by the
concerned authorities.
10. Having regard to the fact that the entire license of the
petitioner has been cancelled, it is expedient that the impugned
order dated 19.09.2026 issued by respondent No.1 be treated
as a show cause notice.
11. The petitioner shall be permitted to file a reply to the
impugned order cum show cause notice dated 19.09.2026 on or
before 06.11.2026. Consequent to reply of the petitioner, the
concerned authority shall afford an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner and take further steps in accordance with law.
12. Until consideration of the matter by respondent No.1, the
petitioner shall be permitted to carry on its business in terms of
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58643
WP No. 30641 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010667292026
the license except dealing with 'Zavicefta' and 'Emblaveo'
injections.
13. All contentions of the parties in the merits of the matter
are kept open.
14. Writ petition is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
BS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0