1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 545 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 545 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 545 OF 2006 Elder Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and anr... Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Anand Kumar for Petitioner. Mr. A. Sayed, A.G.P. for R. Nos. 1 to 5. Mr. Rajiv Chavan with Ms. Ritu Singh i/by T.C. Kaushik for R. No. 6. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED : MARCH 20, 2006 DATED : MARCH 20, 2006 DATED : MARCH 20, 2006 P.C. . Rule. Heard forthwith. . The Petitioner No. 1 has a licence to manufacture pharmaceuticals, medical devices, machinery, health care products, beauty formulations etc. under the Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The respondents according to Petitioners based on the show cause notice dated 7.10.2005 passed order dated 5.1.206 confiscating the goods. This order is the subject matter of the present 2 petition. . The Petitioners have remedy by way of showing cause. In these circumstances, the Petitioners are directed to show cause within two weeks from today. On the reply being received, Respondent No. 3 is directed after hearing the Petitioners and considering the reply to show cause notice to pass a reasoned order within four weeks thereafter. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. If the order be adverse, the same not to be acted upon for the period of four weeks from communication of the same to the Petitioner. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.)