meeting held on 14.12.2022, had though accepted the bid of the lowest bidder to supply medicines but issued letters of acceptance to all the eight bidders to supply the medicines. Similarly, it was reported that four chemists were vending drugs within the hospital area, but there were difference in the prices of drugs sold by them and despite complaints, they were not attended to. The learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record a compilation of various allegations involving the petitioner such as, signing the work order for the PET/CT Scan facilities before he assumed the office of the Director, not checking the cost of the services provided by the vendors, charging more than the prescribed amount from the patients, improper procurement of consumables, non-issuance of Development Completion Certificate before commencement of operation, non-maintenance of inventory, tender violation etc., He also brought to the notice of the Court that a private lab was allowed to operate within the hospital beyond the permissible working hours. He also alleged that there were serious flaws in the tendering process to establish the BMT centre. He also alleged that the drugs required for the Institute were procured through rate contract. He alleged that there was
