- The State of Andhra Pradesh
- The District of Medical Education
- The District Diet Management Committee
- The Superintendent …………………respondents
A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice R. Raghunandan Rao gave orders on the writ petition no. 2157 of 2020 in the case of Sri Venkateshwara Associate vs The State of Andhra Pradesh. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the tender process which happened at the beginning of the year 2020.
The Petitioner-Association had a contract for the supply of diet to inpatient and duty medical staff in the 4th respondent hospital under an agreement for a period of two years. This agreement was extended by another year from 1.02.2019 to 1.02.2020. The 4th respondent – the superintendent had issued a notification calling for the tenders for the allotment of the diet contract. The final round of selection had 7 tenders out of which 3 were rejected and 2 of them had no prior experience in the supply of diet to 500 beds. At last, the petitioner and one more tenderer were left and at this stage, the tender was canceled. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached the court and challenged the cancellation of the tender.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended before the court that according to the rules only the Joint Collector can issue the tender notification. So, the respondent no. 4, the superintendent should not have issued the tender notification dated 10.01.2020. The petitioner further submits that the tender was rejected without any reason and this was done only to help the disqualified tenderers.
The learned Government pleader submitted before the court that the notification was issued with the prior approval of the joint collector and so that cannot be in violation of G.O. Ms. No. 325, health, medical, and family welfare department. Further, it is submitted that the tender was canceled on the grounds of non-submission of various documents that were essential.
The court analyzed the case and found that the appropriate authority for issuing the tender notification was the chairperson of the district-level committee and in the present case, the tender notification has been issued by respondent no. 4, superintendent of the government hospital. In these circumstances, the court thinks it’s appropriate to direct the respondents to reinitiate the entire process of tender for the supply of diet to the inpatients and medical staff, as more than half of the period of the intended period has expired.
The court dismissed the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to immediately initiate the process of tendering of the contract for the supply of diet to inpatients and medical staff of the 4th respondent’s hospital at the earliest and in accordance with the law. There shall be no orders as to costs and any application pending shall also stand closed.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.