HC Rejects Turnover Plea For Supply Of Disposable Syringe

CUTTACK, 8 MARCH 2020:

The Orissa High Court has dismissed a plea challenging Odisha State Medical Corporation (OSMC)’s decision to increase the turnover of firm for becoming eligible to take part in tender for supply of disposable syringes required for hospitals in the State. The corporation had increased the turnover from `35 lakh to `2 crore through a corrigendum to the tender document that had invited bids for supply of 2.82 crore 2cc and 3.17 crore 5cc disposable syringe for 2019-20.

A participating private firm, who had become ineligible after the decision, had filed the petition seeking quashing of the corrigendum alleging that it had given a go-by to the State Government’s policy to promote MSME units. OSMC on it parts had contended that both the disposable syringe items are very essential for day-to-day management of the hospital.

“For that it was decided that the company having strong financial background and good past performance could ensure timely supply of quality items for benefits of the patients. It was decided to keep those two items under `2 crore turnover category for which corrigendum was issued and petitioner was found not qualified,” OSMC contended before the Court.

Dismissing the plea, the division bench of Justice SK Mishra and Justice AK Mishra said, “We cannot direct OSMC to insert an eligibility clause which is otherwise taken away in exercise of their power under Clause No. 6.15 of the tender document for larger public interest. The right exercised by the authority is right. No interference in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is called for.”

In its March 3 order, the division bench held that, “The health of patients in the State is involved therein. The requirement aspect and ability to meet any such exigency are certainly the guiding factors to fix the eligibility norm of the bidder.”  “An ineligible bidder cannot expect right to participation in a tender process. An expectation is legitimate if it is otherwise bonafide and legal. This is the reasonable differentia found in the case in hand where the past of petitioner’s firm is painted with de-recognition for two years in respect of supply of injection syringes in which larger interest of the society is deeply involved,” the bench observed. The New Indian Express