Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010066352026 2026:GAU-AS:5745 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2020/2026 BIJOY KRISHNA DEY AND ANR SON OF LATE RAKHAL CHANDRA DEY RESIDENT OF DHING BAGAN, P.O. AND P.S. DHING, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, PIN-781006. 2:THE DRUGS CONTROLLER (I/C) LICENSING AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-36. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER NAGAON ASSAM P.O.AND P.S. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782006. 4:THE INSPECTOR OF DRUGS OFFICE OF THE DRUGS CONTROL ADMINISTRATION DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-781006 Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA, SR. ADV, MS. P BORAH,MS M NIROLA,MR. K BORUAH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, HEALTH BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 27.04.2026 Heard Mr. P. J. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Health Department (respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4). 2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 04.02.2026 issued by respondent No. 2, whereby the Drug License Nos. NNG/5233 and NNG/5234 issued to the petitioner were suspended. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, being a registered pharmacy, was running the same in accordance with the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules of 1945”), as per the registration granted thereunder. On a complaint filed by one Sahidul Islam, a police case was registered as Dhing P.S. Case No. 292/2025 under Section 105 of the BNS, pursuant to which respondent No. 2 issued notice to the petitioner. Page No.# 3/4 4. Thereafter, pursuant to the aforesaid incident, the petitioner also received a notice dated 19.01.2026 issued by respondent No. 2, directing the petitioner to show cause as to why necessary action should not be taken against them. Subsequently, by the impugned order dated 04.02.2026, respondent No. 2 suspended the drug license of the petitioner till compliance with the defects. 5. The petitioner accordingly filed a statutory appeal before respondent No. 1 on 06.03.2026; however, the said appeal has not yet been considered or disposed of. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed. 6. Mr. P. J. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, submits that at the outset, since the statutory appeal is still pending, a direction may be issued for its consideration and disposal within a reasonable, fixed period of time. 7. Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Health Department, does not oppose the said prayer. 8. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and noting that an appeal under Rule 66(2) of the Rules of 1945 is pending against the impugned order dated 04.02.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of, in the interest of justice, by directing the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Page No.# 4/4 9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant