Islamabad:
The Superior Court of Peshawar (PHC) annulled the award of a contract for supply of multimillone rupees, qualifying the “designed”, “discriminatory” process and a “par excellence case of contracting.”
The decision can shake the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa health acquisition system (KP).
The KP Department of Health had awarded a Contract at M/S Frontier Dextrose LTD for the supply of hospital medicines for fiscal year 2024–2025.
A citizen, Waqar Ahmad, filed a request from complainants Pro Bono Publico through Shumail Ahmad Butt, defender of the legality of the public procurement process.
A Bank of the PHC division comprised of Judge Syed Arshad Ali and Judge Dr. Khurshid Iqbal left aside the offer granted to M/S Frontier Dextrose Ltd through an order dated March 25.
In its detailed order of 10 pages, the Bank ordered the KP Health Department to cancel the existing prize and restart the acquisition process strictly in accordance with the law.
“We allow this request and the direct defendant not 3 cancel the offer offered by defendant No. 6 for the supply of financial year 2024-25 and that restarts the process of acquiring medicines strictly in accordance with the law,” he said.
The Bank said that the general director of drugs and the health services of the Director General, who were present in the Court, were repeatedly asked to explain the logic behind replacing the content of a affidavit.
The Affidavit had to include a company that indicates: “The sub -ist has not manufactured/supplied any lot of medicines, medications, medical devices, surgical disposables, cotton and related goods, etc.
The DTL (drug test laboratory) of the KP or any other public DTL in Pakistan. “
The order said that these officers could not provide any satisfactory response, in addition to stating that such eventuality was addressed by virtue of the 1976 law.
“In particular, they did not offer an explanation or placed any record before the court to demonstrate what required the omission of this essential criterion.
“In the same way, it is disconcerting that when this period is ahead of the notice of the Procurement Authority, he admitted that such omission should not be repeated in the future and address that said clause is restored in the form III of offer (Affidavit).
“However, he condemned the omission in this acquisition only because no competition bidder had raised an objection during the bidding process.
“It should be emphasized that it was not the responsibility of a competitor bid to raise this concern; rather, the authority should have sought comments from the acquisition entity regarding the justification for the elimination/omission of said clause,” he said.
According to the order, when considering carefully, it became clear that this omission was deliberately carried out to allow the participation of M/S Frontier Dextrose LTD in the bidding process.
“This constitutes a case par excellence of incorrect insufficiency, which makes the acquisitions contested contrary to the public interest,” he said.
The sentence referred to the decision of a Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) that highlighted the ethical obligations of the agencies acquired while condemning any practice that compromises the integrity of the process, including the acceptance of the gifts of the suppliers.
“The aforementioned cases law establishes that public procurement must strictly adhere to the principles of transparency, justice and non -discrimination, ensuring that public resources are used efficiently and equitablely.
“Therefore, under no circumstances, any acquisition process funded by public resources is considered valid if integrity does not reach, it lacks justice and transparency, it is contaminated with favoritism and nepotism, or is adapted to benefit a specific individual,” he said.
The court determined that a key clause in the bidding documents was deliberately omitted to facilitate the eligibility of a bidder, without recorded plausible justification.
“This constitutes a case par excellence of incorrect breach, which makes the contested acquisition contrary to the public interest.”
Citing a series of historical judgments of the Supreme Court and the upper courts of Pakistan, the Bank reinforced the constitutional need for transparency, equity and competence in all public hiring. The court emphasized that public funds cannot be dispensed through custom or manipulated tender processes.
