[ad_1]
Calcutta High Court. (image file: PTI)
The court was considering the petition, which challenged a warrant issued by the West Bengal government’s Department of Health that banned unions or groups of self-help groups (SHGs) from providing food in hospitals in the rural sector of the state with up to 50 beds.
The Kolkata High Court recently dismissed a petition challenging a warrant issued by the health department of the West Bengal state government after 13 years of excessive delays.
The memo barred unions or groups of self-help groups (SHGs) from providing food at hospitals in the state’s rural sector of up to 50 beds, and ruled that there was no room for interference in the current written petition.
The panel of Single Judge Sabyasachi Bhattacharya noted, “The empowerment of local women in rural areas by providing them with employment opportunities cannot be faulted from any perspective whatsoever. It cannot be said that certain state oversight is a corrupting factor in this respect, because otherwise, The entire allocation will be unregulated, which may also allow room for corruption, nepotism and opportunism.”
The court added that the state was justified in arguing that the present challenge was preferred after an excessive delay of 13 years.
The petitioner alleged that the state government significantly curtailed the broader participation of members of the general community. While the purported goal behind the decision is women’s empowerment, other women except members of self-help groups were excluded from participating, the petition alleged.
The petitioner argued that the exclusion of open bidding is the bane of Public Enterprises and Employment Schemes.
There are 269 rural hospitals in different districts of West Bengal, the appeal said, and the selection of cooked diet suppliers will now be restricted to local self-help groups, which will stifle competition even among other similar groups or people.
The petitioner also highlighted that the process by which appointments will now be made in rural hospitals will be through selection by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH) on the specific recommendation of the Project Manager, DRDC (District Rural Development Cell), both of whom are government employees They are under the direct control of the state government. Hence, by introducing the selection process, open tendering has been completely abolished and the desired whim of the state government will be subdued in all such appointments, the petition states.
The lawyer who appeared on behalf of the state submitted that the stated purpose of the contested clause was the empowerment of women by promoting the self-help movement, which could not be blamed in any way and was within the constitutional scheme of India.
The lawyer also emphasized that apart from empowering women, it would serve the purpose of supporting local self-help groups.
Furthermore, the lawyer argued that the impugned warrant was a political decision of the state and could not be blamed in any other way.
Hence, it has been argued that the court should not under normal circumstances interfere in such political decisions of the state.
Finally, counsel said that the excessive delay of 13 years remained unexplained in the petition and, therefore, should be disregarded by the dismissal of the petition.
After considering the notes, the court stated that “Clause 3 of the note states that the aforementioned condition relates to the empowerment of women through the promotion of the self-help movement which, in itself, cannot be blamed because the same aims to achieve a public good purpose which is in line with the constitutional scheme.” It cannot be denied that the CMOH is a medical officer competent enough to decide on the eligibility of a particular self-help group for appointment as a supplier of cooked diet to hospitals and sufficient safeguards for the CMOH’s functions have also been laid out in policy.”
The Court noted that at the end of the contested clause, provided that no tender process is required to engage such consortium or group and that the Project Manager recommends only one consortium or group for a particular rural hospital and/or health centers in full satisfaction of the above conditions. The mere existence of such a clause, in the absence of any other nullifying circumstance, cannot make the whole system bad at law.
Accordingly, the court denied the petition.
[ad_2]
