E-Paper
HC sets aside D-G (Medical) order on insecticides supply
THE LUCKNOW Bench of Allahabad High Court has set aside an order dated January 18, 2006 passed by Director-General, Medical and Health Services, Lucknow by which petitioner?s firm Bharat Organics was directed to make fresh supply of insecticides as according to laboratory reports, the previous supply by the petitioner to Allahabad district was found to be sub-standard.
THE LUCKNOW Bench of Allahabad High Court has set aside an order dated January 18, 2006 passed by Director-General, Medical and Health Services, Lucknow by which petitioner’s firm Bharat Organics was directed to make fresh supply of insecticides as according to laboratory reports, the previous supply by the petitioner to Allahabad district was found to be sub-standard.
According to this order, the product of the petitioner was tested by obtaining samples from the containers supplied to Allahabad district. According to the reports of the laboratories, the product supplied by the petitioner was found sub-standard.
By this order, the director-general had also debarred the petitioner’s company from making supply in future for two years.
Passing this decision, a Division Bench comprising Justice AK Yog and Justice Alok Kumar Singh observed, “There is no basis for holding the supplier responsible for deterioration while the product is kept in godowns of the respondent’’.
Besides, the court said, “As far as penalty to debar for two years is concerned, the terms and conditions do not warrant or authorise the authority concerned to debar the petitioner for two years on the basis of laboratory test report of shelf-life in case of samples which are taken behind the back of the supplier.
Two years’ debarment is permissible in a situation wherein the supplier is found guilty on the basis of conducted ‘pre and post’ purchase sample testing report by an authorised laboratory. Admittedly, deficiency in the insecticide supplied by the petitioner was not found sub-standard during ‘pre and post’ purchase sampling’’.
The court also directed the respondents, state government’s top health authorities, to hold any enquiry as deemed appropriate to fix the responsibility of the person or the official/employees who may be responsible for deterioration of the insecticides after its purchase while the goods were in custody in the department.
However, the court said that “it was open to the respondents to frame adequate schemes and in our opinion they must frame the schemes containing adequate provisions to ensure and safeguard that insecticides/pesticides, supplied are as per standard not only in ‘pre and post purchase sample testing’ but also stand the test of ‘shelf-life’ inspite of standard storing condition. If it deteriorates after sale and does not stand the test of ‘shelf life’ because it is inferior or of sub-standard quality, the supplier should be held responsible for the same’’.
