IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 23598 of 2025 M/s V. R Drug Agencies …. Petitioner Ms. S. Patnaik, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.R. Pattnaik, AGA CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 21.07.2026 06. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order of suspension of the drug licences in Form 20-B, 21-B & 20-G bearing No.CU-20702/W, CU- 20703/WC & CU-7692/WX under Annexure-16 and to quash the same directing restoration thereof on the grounds stated. 3. In course of hearing, Ms. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2345 of 2023 (M/s Puja Enterprises Vrs. State of Odisha and others). The submission is that all the licenses of the petitioners have been revoked. Since, the case of the petitioner is identical, in view of the decision in M/s Puja Enterprises as at Annexure-19, it is contended that the petitioner is entitled to similar relief. But referring to the counter affidavit at Flag-P, Mr. Pattnaik, learned AGA for the State justifies the decision of the Authority concerned vis-à-vis cancellation of the licences issued in favour of the petitioner. 4. Considering the action taken by opposite party No.4 leading to the cancellation of the licences issued in favour of the petitioner and having regard to the fact that a similar action was challenged in M/s Puja Enterprises (supra) and it was directed to be reconsidered, this Court is inclined to issue such a direction to opposite party Nos.2 and 4 recording the objection of Mr. Pattnaik, learned AGA with reference to the counter affidavit filed by the State. Considering the pleadings on record, this Court is also of the view that it was not right and justified on the part of opposite party Nos.2 and 4 to revoke licences in Form 21-B and 20-G like in the case of M/s Puja Enterprises. Such is the view of the Court for the reason that the case at hand is identically similar to the facts of the decision (supra) and so the conclusion arrived at. 5. Accordingly, it is ordered. 6. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of in the light of the directions herein above for opposite party Nos.2 and 4 to examine the case of the petitioner in the light of judgment in M/s Puja Enterprises (supra) with a direction to revoke the order of suspension with respect to the drug licenses in Form-21-B and From-20-G and restore the same forthwith and immediately, to consider his plea as regards revocation of the other license in Form-20-B and to take a decision thereon or in the alternative, to consider suspension of it either wholly or only vis-a-vis the subject drugs alleged to be found ‘not of standard quality’ and ‘spurious’ as the case may be concluding the above exercise upon providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner followed by a reasoned order at the earliest preferably within six weeks from the date of communication of this judgment regard being had to the observations made herein above and the settled position of law. As a necessary corollary, the impugned orders as at Annexures-14 & 16 are hereby set aside with the matter restored to the file of opposite party No.2 for compliance of the directions as aforesaid within the stipulated period as has been fixed. In the circumstances, there is no order as to costs. 7. Urgent copy of this order be issued as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Rojina Designation: Junior Stenographer