CHOUDHURY MEDICAL STORE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for quashment of the eviction orders dtd. 21/9/2023 and 1/11/2023 passed by opposite party No. 4 under Annexures-8 and 10 respectively with a direction to opposite party No. 2 to allow him to run 24X7 medicine shop inside the campus of AIIMS after renewal of the contract dtd. 1/11/2021 on the grounds stated.

(2.) The petitioner is a registered proprietorship firm involved in selling of medicines and other products from a store at AIIMS, Bhubaneswar, which was allowed for a period of two years. According to the petitioner, opposite party No.3 invited tender on 28/10/2020 for opening and running of 24X7 pharmacy/chemist shop within the campus of AIIMS and pursuant to the said tender call notice, the petitioner participated in the bidding process and finally, the Technical Evaluation Committee found it to be qualified, a decision stood was approved by the competent authority. It is further pleaded that opposite party No.2 thereafter issued a notice on 8/2/2021 for opening of the financial bid with the date and time fixed and the process included scrutiny of all the documents upon submission of the documents in pursuance of the request received by letter dtd. 11/1/2021, whereafter, the petitioner was declared as L-1 bidder. It is stated that against the bid of the petitioner, the other bidders approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 9899 of 2021 and the same was disposed of on 31/3/2021 and then, RVWPET No.89 of 2021 was filed, which was dismissed on 5/7/2021. It is pleaded that after validity of the tender process was upheld in favour of the petitioner, opposite party No. 3 issued the work order dtd. 3/5/2021 in its favour with an agreement executed on 1/11/2020. It is claimed that the petitioner availed a loan from the Bank sanctioned in the year 2022 in connection with the shop but in the meanwhile, received a termination notice dtd. 2/12/2022 (Annexure-3) with an intimation that such termination of contract is with immediate effect carrying a direction to vacate the premises and being aggrieved, W.P.(C) No. 34167 of 2022 was filed, which was disposed of by order dtd. 15/12/2022 (Annexure-4). It is alleged that without complying the directions issued by this Court under Annexure-4, opposite party No.4 passed the order dtd. 21/3/2023 (Annexure-5) thereby terminating the contract of the petitioner to run the shop inside AIIMS campus and was communicated via e-mail on 24/3/2023 to vacate the hospital premises within five days from the date of receipt of such intimation. It is further alleged that the orders of termination of contract and vacation of the premises by the decision of opposite party No.4 is without following due process of law, inasmuch as, the petitioner was not provided any opportunity of hearing and furthermore, there has been non-compliance of the Court's order dtd. 15/12/2022. According to the petitioner, being aggrieved of the issuance of the termination order dtd. 21/3/2023 followed by a notice to vacate the premises of the hospital, W.P.(C) No. 9406 of 2023 was filed and thereafter, CONTC No. 2013 of 2023, later to which, opposite party No.4 withdrew the show cause issued to them so also termination and eviction orders and tendered unconditional apology, whereafter, the contempt proceeding was dropped by an order under Annexure-7 series and when the shop was once again made operational, letter of closure of contract and eviction dtd. 21/9/2023 (Annexure-8) was received without assigning any reason for renewal of the same and on receipt of such letter, representation was submitted with a plea that previous vendor was granted several extensions and was allowed to run the shop for almost six years and hence, in view of such renewal clause, there has been a legitimate expectation for grant of renewal but the same has been denied by opposite party No.4 with a direction to vacate and handover the premises by letter dtd. 1/11/2023 (Annexure-10). Such eviction notice and non-renewal of the contract by the opposite parties with the petitioner, as pleaded further, is illegal and arbitrary, hence, therefore, the same is liable to be interfered with.

(3.) On contrary, the opposite parties justify eviction and termination of contract by orders vide Annexures-8 and 10 with a plea that discretion lies with the Authority concerned and in the facts and circumstances of the case, such renewal of contract was not possible and therefore, it was declined. The contention is that Annexures-8 and 10 cannot be termed as notice and action for eviction and as far as Annexure-8 is concerned, the same is merely an intimation to the petitioner to vacate the premises on completion of contractual period executed on 1/11/2023. It is further pleaded that Annexure-10 is a reply to the notice of renewal of contract where the authority expressed its view not to extend or renew the same, so therefore, the action is not in relation to eviction. In a reply to the petitioner's plea that the action is unjustified, it is also pleaded by the opposite parties that Annexures- 8 and 10 does not disclose action for eviction in terms of the OPP (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act. It is again pleaded that the petitioner since did not vacate the premises after expiry of the contract period, only thereafter, action was initiated under the aforesaid Act, during which, opportunity to file a show case was provided and hence, the contention that the proceeding is not tenable is liable to be rejected as any such occupation of the premises inside the campus of AIIMS, Bhubaneswar on expiry of the contract has become unauthorized. Referring to Annexure-B/2 series, it is claimed that a criminal action against the petitioner is pending in 2 C.C.Case No. 317 of 2007 in the file of learned SDJM, Sambalpur and since there has been allegations received towards distribution of wrong medicines etc. with reference to the complaints under Annexure-C/2 and D/2 and the fact that issuance of work order is based on documents with false annual turnover shown and submitted at the time of bid in respect of which a complaint dtd. 16/11/2022 (Annexure-E/2) was received and with other events for selling expiry goods and medicines on a complaint (Annexure F/2), wherein, the petitioner was directed to file a show cause, such a decision was taken not to continue with the contract but to terminate it in order to avoid future litigation, hence, such notice was issued to vacate the premises with the expiry of the contract period and when it was not vacated, the same was followed by an action under the OPP (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act.