Dismissed

Retail Sale Chemist Association v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Mar 2014CWP/19571/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the tender notice for running medical-store shops in Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, arguing the 50% discount and ₹50 lakh bank-guarantee were excessive. The bench observed that such terms, supported by收到的租金 bids and parallels with PGIMER, were not unjustified and dismissed the petition without interference.

What the court decided

AI extract

Retail Sale Chemist Association Vs State of… — Company and Corporate | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.19571 of 2013 (O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 25.03.2014

¶3

Retail-Sale Chemist Association

¶4

…..Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTI CE SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI

¶9

Present: Mr. Deepak Nayar, Advocate for the petitioner

¶10

Mr. Hari Pal Verm a, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab

¶11

SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE : (Oral)

¶12

The petition has been filed by Retail-Sale Chemist Association seeking to assail the tender notice dated 21.8.2013 for running the m edical-store shops in the OPD Blocks in Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar.

¶13

It is the say of the petitioner that the onerous condition put of fifty percent discount on each item coupled with the requirement of a bank-guarantee of ` 50 lacs is not justified.

¶14

Learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents, by reference to the pleadings, points out that fifty percent discount sought for is not unusual and such discounts are being given by the chemists. It is stated that objective is to make available medicines at the cheapest rates to the patients.

¶15

Chand Parkash 2014.03.26 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CW P- 19571 - 2013

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

The other aspect pointed out by learned Additional Advocate General is that the condition of 50 lacs bank-guarantee though at first blush may seem excessive, keeping in mind the normal expected per day turnover of 1 lac is not excessive. It is also submitted that there are various cases pending where huge amounts are sought to be recovered from chemists who have either overstayed or there are other problems and there is nothing available with the respondents to obtain the amounts. Our attention has also been drawn to the additional affidavit where an averment has been made that even in PGIMER similarly a bank-guarantee of ` 50 lacs has been taken and also fifty percent discounts are being given on the MRP.

¶19

In view of what has been contended by learned Additional Advocate General, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned advertisem ent/ tender notice as the rent itself is stated to be in the range of ` 3.94 lacs per month as per the bids received and similar practices are being followed by other hospitals which is the basis for settling the terms and conditions of the tender.

¶20

Dismissed.

¶21

( SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL ) CHI EF JUSTI CE

¶22

25.03.2014 ( ARUN PALLI ) parkash* JUDGE

¶23

Chand Parkash 2014.03.26 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Retail Sale Chemist Association v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Retail Sale Chemist Association v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Niilm University Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dinesh Chadha Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vijay Bansal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

UOI Vs Bharat Sarkar Mudranalya Karamchari & or

Baljinder Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gian Chand Vs State of Haryana etc.