BHAVYA HEALTH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED (APGENCO), REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited (APGENCO) operates dispensaries/project hospitals at its power stations to cater to the health related needs of its employees. Fourteen such dispensaries are stated to be operating presently. The case on hand relates to the dispensaries of the APGENCO at (1) Lower Sileru Hydro Electric Power Station (LSHEPS) at Muthugudem, Khammam District, (2) Upper Sileru Hydro Electric Power Station (USHEPS), Visakhapatnam, (3) Srisailam Left Bank Hydro Power Station (SLBHPS), Mahabubnagar, and (4) Srisailam Right Bank Hydro Power Station (SRBHPS), Kurnool District. Initially, these dispensaries were maintained by the APGENCO itself. However, on 22.04.2008, the APGENCO called for tenders for maintenance of these dispensaries and the successful bidder was Nagarjuna Hospital, Vijayawada. Bhavya Health Services Private Limited, the petitioner company, entered into a tie-up with Nagarjuna Hospital, Vijayawada, with the approval of the APGENCO and was entrusted the work relating to providing medical services at these four dispensaries.

(2.) The extended contract period relating to these dispensaries expired on 30.09.2011 but the APGENCO informed the petitioner company by its letter dated 17.09.2011 that the existing arrangement for rendering medical services was extended until further orders. However, as regards another such contract with Yashoda Hospitals, Hyderabad, the seventh respondent herein, relating to maintenance of its hospitals at RTS Ramagundam, Kurnool District and NSHES, Nagarjunasagar, Nalgonda District, the APGENCO, under 2011 dated 19.05.2011, extended the expired contract for a period of two years i.e. from 23.05.2011 to 22.05.2013. As the petitioner company was not given the benefit of extension by a further period of two years on par with Yashoda Hospitals, Hyderabad, it filed W.P. No. 1515 of 2012 before this Court complaining of discrimination and arbitrariness on the part of the APGENCO.

(3.) Initially, interim orders were granted in this writ petition on 24.01.2012 to continue with the petitioner company's services until further orders. The writ petition itself was disposed of on 16.07.2012 when it was brought to the notice of this Court that the APGENCO proposed to call for open tenders for allotting the outsourcing work of maintaining the dispensaries in question and as the learned counsel for the petitioner company submitted that in view of this decision of the APGENCO, his client could have no grievance. The order records that when the learned counsel for the petitioner company sought the leave of the Court to permit it to participate in the tender process as and when called for by the APGENCO, the learned standing counsel for the APGENCO stated that the petitioner company's tender would be considered subject to it satisfying the tender conditions.