HASEEB PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. TELANGANA STATE MEDICAL SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P. Kishore Rai, learned Standing Counsel for The Telangana State Medical Services & Infrastructure Development Corporation (in short 'TSMSIDC), for respondent No.1, and the learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health, for respondent No.2.

(2.) Aggrieved by the issuance of the show cause notice, dated 21.06.2017, by the respondent No.1, the present Writ Petition is filed.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the State of Telangana has floated a tender for procurement of general medicines vide Tender Notice No.4/TSMSIDC/Medicines/2015-2016, dated 20.02.2015. Petitioner Company had participated in the tender process and was awarded the contract on 20.02.2015. As per the terms of the award, the petitioner Company manufactured and supplied 25,00,169 bottles of Compound Sodium Lactate IP 500 ml B.F.S. amounting to Rs.2,89,76,956/- in the year 2015-16 and 2016-17. Petitioner Company also supplied a total number of 18,50,651 bottles of Sodium Chloride Injection IP 0.9% in 500ml. B.F.S. amounting to Rs.2,07,08,784/- in the State of Telangana. Thus, the petitioner Company has supplied the quantities, amounting to Rs.4,96,85,740/-. While so, due to an unfortunate incident took place on 26.05.2016 in Sarojini Devi Eye Hospital, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad, as many as 13 patients were reported to have lost their eyesight, for which the petitioner was blamed alleging that all the stocks of IV Fluids manufactured and supplied by the petitioner Company were contaminated. Therefore, the quantity of 7,57,917 bottles of Compound Sodium Lactate IP 500 ml. B.F.S. amounting to Rs.87,90,357/- and also the quantity of 4,21,375 bottles of Sodium Chloride Injections IP 0.9% 500 ml B.F.S. amounting to Rs.47,18,900/- were recalled. Thereafter, the petitioner Company had sent various samples of the products for analysis to the Government Analyst Drug Control Laboratory (DCA Lab), Hyderabad. The DCA Lab issued a report stating that the samples were not of 'Standard Quality'. As against the same, the petitioner Company has referred the report of the DCA Lab before the Central Drug Laboratory, which over ruled the report of the DCA Lab, with a finding that the samples of the petitioner Company are of 'Standard Quality'.