 registered on the issue that the respondents are not ensuring proper operation and management of ambulances of different varieties in the State of Madhya Pradesh. ){kind=link}
The Madhya Pradesh High Court disposed of a Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation (PIL) registered on the issue that the respondents are not ensuring proper operation and management of ambulances of different varieties in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
The ambulances are being run under the aegis of the third respondent (Mission Director National Health Mission) and some through the respondent-State. Various illegalities have been pointed out in the running of these ambulances, which was tendered in favour of respondent No.6 (Health Care Limited).
The Counsel respondent No.3 submitted that the fresh tender has been awarded. The new tenderer is performing its duties as stipulated in the tender documents.
It is further submitted by the Counsel that the illegalities and infirmities pointed out by the petitioner have been taken care of while awarding the tender to the new tenderer.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra did not find any ground to proceed further in the matter.
“However, if any deficiencies are found in the running of these ambulances with respect to the presently awarded tenderer, the petitioner is always at liberty to move this Court thereafter. So far as this petition is concerned, we do not find that any further orders are called for”, the order reads.
It is pertinent to note that the High Court on 25-09-2019 while dismissing a PIL , noted that the National Health Mission, M.P. has itself found several illegalities, irregularities and deficiencies in the services provided by the respondents and relating to the Integrated Referral Transport System relating to 108 Ambulances, Janani Express, Mobile Medical Unit and 104 Health Helpline and other services and that a notice in that respect has already been issued to the respondents by the Mission Director recording references of the previous letters and notices issued to the respondents in 2017 . Therefore the Court finds it appropriate to take up the issue raised in the petition as suo motu.