Archive · 30 Aug 2026
Bombay High Court Challenges Maharashtra FDA Enforcement Procedures
The Maharashtra FDA cancelled a licence at one of Cipla’s facilities in Pune.
Cipla said it was not given enough time to explain its side.
A hearing was scheduled on August 26, which was a public holiday in Maharashtra.
Cipla asked for more time, but the licence was cancelled soon afterward.
The Bombay High Court said this process was unfair and called the FDA’s approach “high-handed.”
The FDA withdrew the cancellation and will start the process again.
It will give Cipla a new notice and consider the company’s response.
The court has also reviewed FDA actions against other businesses.
These cases show that regulators can enforce safety rules, but they must follow fair procedures and explain their decisions.
The Maharashtra FDA withdrew its cancellation of Cipla’s drug-sale licence at its Wadki facility in Pune.
The Bombay High Court found that Cipla had not received a fair opportunity to respond before the licence was cancelled.
The FDA will issue a fresh show-cause notice and make a reasoned decision after considering Cipla’s response.
The original action involved alleged packaging, record-keeping, storage and recall irregularities concerning Reactin Plus tablets.
The court has also scrutinised FDA action against restaurants, dairies, hotels, milk businesses and pharmaceutical companies, while allowing some enforcement actions to continue.
- Who
- The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration, Cipla Pharma & Life Sciences, the Bombay High Court and other businesses affected by FDA enforcement actions.
- What
- The FDA withdrew its cancellation of Cipla’s drug-sale licence, while the High Court scrutinised whether the regulator’s enforcement actions were proportionate and procedurally fair.
- When
- The FDA issued a show-cause notice on August 13, received Cipla’s response on August 25, scheduled a hearing for August 26 and faced High Court scrutiny on August 29; the original cancellation took effect on August 27.
- Where
- Cipla’s carrying and forwarding facility is at Wadki in Pune, Maharashtra; the other cases involved businesses in Mumbai, Navi Mumbai, Thane and Aurangabad.
- Why
- The court found that Cipla was not given an adequate opportunity to be heard and said regulators should consider whether alleged violations justify immediate suspension or cancellation and provide sufficient reasons.
Businesses and Procedural Concerns
FDA Enforcement Responsibilities
Opportunity to be heard
Businesses and Procedural Concerns
Cipla argued that it was not given an adequate opportunity to respond because its hearing was scheduled on a public holiday and its request for an adjournment was not accepted before cancellation.
FDA Enforcement Responsibilities
The FDA agreed to withdraw the order, issue a fresh notice and reconsider the matter after receiving Cipla’s response.
Basis for the Cipla action
Businesses and Procedural Concerns
Cipla said the cancellation did not raise concerns about the safety, quality or efficacy of its products and did not indicate a patient-safety issue.
FDA Enforcement Responsibilities
The FDA cited alleged packaging and artwork problems, differences between physical and computerised stock records, gaps in transaction records and alleged non-compliance with recall directions.
Scope of regulatory action
Businesses and Procedural Concerns
Businesses challenging FDA orders have argued that suspensions or cancellations should be proportionate, account for corrective action and be supported by adequate reasons.
FDA Enforcement Responsibilities
The court has not rejected FDA enforcement generally; it declined urgent interim relief in the Udupi Swaad case and has assessed each matter according to the alleged violation and the procedure followed.
- Regulator
- Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration
- Company
- Cipla Pharma & Life Sciences
- Facility
- Carrying and forwarding unit at Wadki, Pune
- Medicine involved
- Reactin Plus tablets, described as a Schedule H prescription medicine
- Original allegations
- Packaging and artwork issues, stock-record discrepancies, gaps in purchase and sale records, and concerns about recall compliance
- Court response
- The Bombay High Court described the FDA’s handling of the Cipla matter as “high-handed” and questioned the fairness of the procedure
- Next step
- The FDA will issue a fresh show-cause notice and take a fresh, reasoned decision after considering Cipla’s response
- Broader scrutiny
- The court has examined FDA actions involving restaurants, dairies, hotels, milk businesses and pharmaceutical companies
