Pune: The Bombay high court, taking note of a 100% compliance granted to Camp restaurant Pind Punjab in a fresh inspection, held that the FDA Pune division’s order of June 23, 2026, suspending its licence “shall lose its efficacy and the licence shall stand restored forthwith”.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had ordered a conditional suspension of Pind Punjab’s licence, citing deficiencies found during its surprise inspection on June 22. The restaurant management moved an appeal before the FDA commissioner, who on June 28 ordered a fresh inspection of the facility.As the appeal remained pending without any next date of hearing, the eatery moved the high court seeking various reliefs on the grounds that it was suffering huge financial loss as well as loss of goodwill and reputation.On Thursday (July 16), a high court bench of acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad held that “the pending appeal before the (FDA) commissioner has achieved its purpose and the same stands disposed of, and the commissioner (office) concerned would issue a formal order disposing of the appeal from its file”.Advocate Abhijit Desai, representing Pind Punjab, had submitted an eight-page auto-generated report of the fresh inspection of the eatery carried out on July 8, and the same showed a 100% compliance. The advocates representing the ministry of health and public safety, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, and the FDA secretary and authorities in Maharashtra, conceded that the auto-generated report cannot be disputed.“After the report was generated on July 8, 2026, the officer concerned, N R Sarkate, should have issued a consequential order restoring the licence. He probably has not done so because the appeal was pending,” the bench said.“(The) proceedings initiated vide the appeal need not be taken forward since the petitioner has cured all the deficiencies and he has been granted 100% compliance report,” the bench added.Desai told TOI, “Our client opened the restaurant last (Thursday) evening consequent to the high court order disposing of the appeal pending before the FDA commissioner. Our main grievance was that the suspension order was passed without any improvement notice under Section 32(1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and without affording the petitioner any opportunity of being heard, and was in violation of the mandatory statutory procedure and principles of natural justice.”
