IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11378 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.VINOD, MANAGING PARTNER & LICENSEE, M/S.ACCESS PHARMA, 23/326-15, N.P.TOWERS, WEST FORT, PUNKUNNAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN (SR.) SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SRI.ALAN PAPALI SRI.M.B.PRAJITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DRUGS CONTROLLER, OFFICE OF THE DRUGS CONTROLLER, THRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT DRUGS CONTROLLER, THRISSUR. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2008 ALONG WITH 11387/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.C.Nos.11378, 11386 11385 & 11387 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners in these writ petitions are wholesale distributors of allopathic medicines who have been granted licenses under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules. Facts of all these cases are similar and in all these cases after a show cause notice and receiving their explanation, the third respondent has issued orders cancelling the license. 2. Aggrieved by the order of the cancellation of their licenses, invoking the appellate remedy provided under Rule 66(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, the petitioners have filed appeals before the first respondent. In WPC No.11378/08, Ext.P6 is the appeal along with a stay petition. In WPC Nos.11385/2008 and 11386/2008, Ext.P8 are the appeals and stay petitions are also attached to the appeals. In WPC No.11387/2008 Ext.P9 is the appeal and stay petition. The aforesaid appeals and the stay petitions are pending consideration of the first respondent. WPC 11378/2008 2 3. According to the petitioners, consequent on the orders terminating their license, they are deprived of their livelihood and complaining of inordinate delay in the disposal of the appeals. These writ petitions are filed, seeking appropriate reliefs. 4. Since the petitioners have already pursued the statutory remedy before the appellate authority and the appellate authority is seized all the matters, I do not think it is necessary for this Court to examine the contentions, at least, at this stage. In my view, the appropriate course to be adopted is to direct the first respondent is to consider and pass orders on the appeals referred to above. Considering the fact that as a consequence of the orders of termination, the petitioners herein are prevented from carrying on their business, it is essential that the appeals should be decided on an expeditious basis. 5. Accordingly, I direct that the appeals referred to above shall be disposed of with notice to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this WPC 11378/2008 3 judgment before the first respondent for compliance and on production there of, it will be open to the first respondent to schedule hearing of the appeals on which date the petitioners should appear before him. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE csl