SEEMA AGENCY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a chemist and supplier of various types of drugs / medicines, whereas respondent No.2 herein - All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Raipur, is one of the health care institutes established by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India under the Pradhan Mantri Swasthya Sukraksha Yojna (PMSSY) with the aim of correcting regional imbalances in quality tertiary level health care in the country and for attaining selfsufficiency in graduate and postgraduate medical education and training. In order to achieve its aim, the respondent AIIMS issued a global tender inviting applications for establishment of Chemist shop at AIIMS, Raipur and ultimately, upon completion of formalities, the petitioner's offer was accepted and letter of award was issued to the petitioner on 812013 and agreement was signed on 2412014 to setup and operate 24x7 pharmacy/chemist shop within the premises of AIIMS, Raipur for supply of medicines/ surgical consumables/implants/orthotic and prosthetic devices etc. on discounted rates with a condition of maximum accepted discount of 65.30% rebate on printed MRP inclusive of VAT. The petitioner was allotted 735 sq.ft. as earmarked on monthly rent of 48/ per sq.ft. and ultimately, shop was handedover to the petitioner on 12 2014 and it is stated to have been made functional by the petitioner with effect from 1722014. The said shop was allotted for a period of three years. The terms and conditions which is a part of the agreement provides a clause i.e. clause 4.04 which specifically provides that the contract shall initially be for a period of three years from the date of signing of contract, however, strictly on the basis of satisfactory performance, it may be extended for a further period agreed between the parties on same terms and conditions. Since the petitioner's term was going to expire on 2312017, the petitioner made a request before the AIIMS authorities on 298 2016 for extension of agreement of the said shop for a further period which has been regretted by respondent No.2 on 1012017 leading to filing of a writ petition questioning the memo dated 101 2017, but lateron the writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to move fresh and by letter dated 252017, the petitioner's agreement for running the pharmacy store was extended till 31102017 on the same terms and conditions as earlier agreed upon between the parties. Upon completion of six months, when fresh notice dated 25102017 was served to the petitioner that no further extension can be granted and as per PMSSY Division, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, a Jan Aushadhi Store is to be opened in the premises of AIIMS, Raipur, this writ petition has been filed feeling aggrieved and questioning that order.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that AIIMS is State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and it cannot act arbitrarily in awarding the said shop to M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited which is already running a pharmacy store in the name of Amrit Pharmacy and if at all, a Jan Aushadhi Store is to be opened, it can be opened in the same premises which is allotted to M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited. Such an action of the respondents in getting the pharmacy store allotted to the petitioner being vacated for allotting the same to M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited will not only give rise to monopoly of M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited, but also will be detrimental to the interest of poor patients who are getting benefited from the store run by the petitioner which is providing medicines at discounted rates of 65.30% on the printed MRP. It is also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's performance is quite satisfactory and the petitioner has a valid and enforceable right to get the lease renewed based on the principle of legitimate expectation and thus, issuance of the impugned memo is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ petition be allowed and the respondents be directed to renew the contract agreement already entered into between the parties for a reasonable period so that the petitioner can run the medical shop smoothly on the suit premises.

(3.) Return has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating inter alia that a Jan Aushadhi Store is required to be opened in the premises of AIIMS under the supervision of M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited. It is the case of the respondents that M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited is a Government of India enterprise. M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited apart from its products provides services like infrastructure development, healthcare services and procurement & consultancy services. It is the further case of the respondents that in AIIMS, Raipur, two shops are earmarked for supply of medicines to the needy people. The other shop is already allotted to M/s. HLL Lifecare Limited for sale of general medicines under the name of Amrit Pharmacy which is for general medicines different from generic and AMRIT stands for Affordable Medicines and Reliable Implants for Treatment. Supply of generic medicine in the new Jan Aushadhi Outlet will reduce the cost of medicine to the extent of more than 70% for needy people. The scheme of supply of drugs is formulated under the direction of the Health Ministry for supply of cheap and quality medicine to the general public especially the down trodden section of the society. The petitioner has no right of renewal as the action of AIIMS is just, proper and fair. Even otherwise, the petitioner's premises were inspected by a team constituted by the Medical Superintendent, AIIMS, Raipur known as Drug Store Inspection Committee, on 81 2016 and report is filed as Annexure R2 which goes to show that the performance of the petitioner was also not in accordance with the agreed terms. The petitioner has no valid and enforceable right to get the lease renewed as there is a change in the policy and a Jan Aushadhi Outlet in the AIIMS premises has to be opened as per the notification dated 12th June, 2017 issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, PMSSY Division, as such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed with cost.