.jpg)
.jpg)
.png)
Sunday, October 6, 2024
‘Students missing MBBS by a whisker are picking Ayurveda as next choice’
‘Students missing MBBS by a whisker are picking Ayurveda as next choice’
Times Special Hemali.Chhapia@timesofindia.com 06.10.2024
Mumbai : In Maharashtra, private Ayurveda colleges closed their recent first-round admissions with a NEET score cut-off of 387, while private dental colleges settled at 396. Dental still holds a slight edge, but the competition is uneven as there are 95 private Ayurveda colleges compared to 25 private dental institutions.
A similar trend is seen in govt institutions: admissions to the four dental colleges ended at a NEET score of 606, while the cut-off at the 22 govt and aided Ayurveda colleges was 436 at the end of the first round. “This year, top Ayurveda colleges have recorded high cut-offs. Students who missed an MBBS seat by a whisker, have put down their next option as Ayurveda instead of dentistry. Hence, admission in several colleges, including mine, has crossed a score of 450,” said Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) standing committee chairman Balasaheb Pawar.
There is another indicator of the growing interest in Ayurveda, which has the highest number of colleges and seats after nursing: There is a beeline to start more Ayurveda colleges, said sources from the CET cell. Pawar added that after the pandemic, the dental market collapsed and there have been vacant seats in certain govt. dental colleges in the past three years. “Before the pandemic, Ayurveda was languishing and, though there were fewer colleges than now, seats were going vacant,” he said. Pawar pegs Ayurveda’s rising popularity to several factors: opening up of govt jobs for Ayurveda graduates, the expansion of their scope of work that allows them to practise as general physicians and the increase in the number of patients turning to “various Indian-pathy” post-Covid. Ayurveda’s rise has been so swift that there are whispers that some colleges now charge capitation fees—though illegal, it’s a sign of the field’s growing clout.
In this backdrop, Ayurveda colleges have a new demand: parity with MBBS institutions. College owners want the same tuition norms granted to MBBS under the institutional quota. “Ayurveda colleges previously charged 3X the regular fee for institutional quota seats, while MBBS colleges were allowed to charge 5X. This year, Ayurveda colleges demanded the 5X rule be extended to them too. Their demand made to the medical education ministry, has been forwarded to the Fee Regulatory Committee. But colleges are already charging 5X fee,” said parent representative Sachin Bangad. MUHS vice-chancellor Lt Gen (Retd) Dr Madhuri Kanitkar said she is steering Ayurveda into uncharted territory. “With a sharp focus on rigorous research, enhanced standards in Ayurvedic education, and a commitment to a truly holistic view of health, we are redefining the field. Several Indians practise pluralism—someone at home follows Ayurveda, someone swears by homeopathy, sciences that are wholesome and stress on health being not just curative, but also preventive, promotive, curative, rehabilitative and palliative,” she said.
The creation of a dedicated AYUSH department and the appointment of an Ayurvedic doctor as pro-vice chancellor for the first time are strong signals that the university is focused on Ayurveda. Senior Ayurvedic pediatrician Dr Hetal Nagda has observed a notable shift: Ayurveda has gained momentum post-Covid, with support from multiple fronts. “The Indian govt has championed it, digitising records and promoting its benefits, but what's striking is people from all walks of life are now embracing it.” Even allopathic doctors, she said, refer children to Ayurvedic practitioners for “certain conditions”. She said an “Ayurvedic renaissance” is underway. "Students from around the world are flocking to institutes in Jamnagar, parts of Kerala and Jaipur. Belgium and Germany, where Ayurveda was once synonymous with massage, now have clinics run by Ayurvedic physicians. Dubai has seen an uptick in clinics catering to the Keralite diaspora, and it’s flourishing across the United States," Dr Nagda said.
Saturday, October 5, 2024
.jpg)
Corruption Charges Against Officers Of Tender Scrutiny Committee Cannot Result In Cancellation Of Valid Tender: Karnataka High Court
Corruption Charges Against Officers Of Tender Scrutiny Committee Cannot Result In Cancellation Of Valid Tender: Karnataka High Court
30 Jan 2023 2:51 PM
The Karnataka High Court has said that a tender inviting authority is empowered only to cancel the tender prior to notification of award and execution of the contract. Once the award is notified, it is statutorily impermissible to withdraw or cancel the tender except for violation of the tender conditions, said the court.
Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by M/s Allengers Medical Systems Limited and directed Karnataka State Medical Supplies Corporation Limited to issue purchase order for portable X-ray machines in favour of the company pursuant to the Tender Notification dated 27-10-2021 and award of tender in its favour, within 2 weeks.
The bench said,
“Once the award is notified and contract is executed it becomes a concluded process of tender. The tender then can be cancelled only on violation of conditions of agreement or award by the tenderer. Any unilateral cancellation of tender in the midstream or after execution of the contract cannot be countenanced, more particularly, when the contracting authority is a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.”
In 2021, the Corporation issued a notice inviting tenders for procurement of 100mA Portable X-ray machines. The petitioner submitted the tender along with other bidders.
After scrutiny by the Tender Scrutiny Committee, the petitioner was declared to be technically qualified and later emerged as the successful bidder. Later, a notification was issued by the Corporation notifying the award of contract in favour of the petitioner on 02-03-2022.
Pursuant to the notification of award, an agreement was signed between the parties and thereafter, a demand draft for supply of 165 Portable X-ray machines of 100mA was submitted by the petitioner for issuance of purchase order and a separate agreement for such purchase was also entered into between the parties. In spite of all these, no purchase order was issued as was required, in terms of the tender notification and the agreement entered into between the parties.
The petitioner approached the court and on issuance of notice. the corporation issued a communication dated November 3, 2022, informing about cancellation of tender order. It argued that that in the hope of getting a purchase order, it has procured all the machines and kept ready for them distribution and has spent several lakhs in the process.
The government defended its action by saying that if there is fraud involved in a tender, the tender can be cancelled at any time. It claimed there are certain charges of corruption in the declaration of the petitioner to be the successful bidder, which came to light later and owing to the complaint, a decision was taken to cancel the tender.
However, it was admitted that the petitioner was declared to be the successful bidder and a contract was also entered into for the purpose of distribution of portable x-ray machines with the petitioner.
The bench said if there are corruption charges against officers of the Tender Scrutiny Committee, it is for the appropriate authority to take action. It cannot result in cancellation of a valid tender, it added
“A notice inviting tender can be withdrawn or cancelled only upto a particular stage. Once it crosses the said stage, any unilateral cancellation would be an arbitrary muexercise of power," said the court.
Observing that Article 14 of the Constitution of India mandates that every action of the State should pass through the golden thread of non-arbitrariness, the court said the Corporation is a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
“Being a State it would not behove of the 2nd respondent to act arbitrarily," said the court.
The court said the cancelling of the tender — after the tender process was concluded, award was notified and contract was signed with the petitioner — "would amount to arbitrary exercise of power and violative of tenets of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”
Case Title: M/s Allengers Medical Systems Ltd And State of Karnataka
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.17634 OF 2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 33
Date of Order: 25--01-2023
Appearance: Advocate K Satish for petitioner.
AGA M.Vinod Kumar for R-1, R-3 TO R-5.
Advocate Sumana Baliga for R2.
Supreme Court Cautions Authories Against Arbitrary Cancellation Of Public Tenders; Says It Can Impact Private-Public Partnerships
Supreme Court Cautions Authories Against Arbitrary Cancellation Of Public Tenders; Says It Can Impact Private-Public Partnerships
11 July 2024 12:46 AM
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court cautioned the public authorities against cancelling public tenders arbitrarily and stressed the importance of upholding the sanctity of contracts.
The Court explained that public tenders emanate from the Doctrine of Public Trust and are designed to provide a level playing field for all potential bidders
"The sanctity of contracts is a fundamental principle that underpins the stability and predictability of legal and commercial relationships. When public authorities enter into contracts, they create legitimate expectations that the State will honour its obligations. Arbitrary or unreasonable terminations undermine these expectations and erode the trust of private players from the public procurement processes and tenders," the Court observed.
"When private parties perceive that their contractual rights can be easily trampled by the State, they would be dissuaded from participating in public procurement processes which may have a negative impact on such other public-private partnership ventures and ultimately it is the public who would have to bear the brunt thereby frustrating the very object of public interest."
Observing that the decision of the State to cancel the public tender must be based on bona fide consideration being reflected in its decision-making process, and not on extraneous grounds, the Supreme Court said that the failure of the Public Authority to record valid reasons for the cancellation of the Tender awarded for the public purpose warrants judicial review.
"Cancellation of a contract deprives a person of his very valuable rights and is a very drastic step, often due to significant investments having already been made by the parties involved during the subsistence of the contract. Failure on the part of the courts to zealously protect the binding nature of a lawful and valid tender, would erode public faith in contracts and tenders. Arbitrary terminations of contract create uncertainty and unpredictability, thereby discouraging public participation in the tendering process. When private parties perceive that their contractual rights can be easily trampled by the State, they would be dissuaded from participating in public procurement processes which may have a negative impact on such other public-private partnership ventures and ultimately it is the public who would have to bear the brunt thereby frustrating the very object of public interest."
Court cautions authorities to be careful in cancelling public tenders
"We caution the public authorities to be circumspect in disturbing or wriggling out of its contractual obligations through means beyond the terms of the contract in exercise of their executive powers. We do not say for a moment that the State has no power to alter or cancel a contract that it has entered into. However, if the State deems it necessary to alter or cancel a contract on the ground of public interest or change in policy then such considerations must be bona-fide and should be earnestly reflected in the decision-making process and also in the final decision itself. We say so because otherwise, it would have a very chilling effect as participating and winning a tender would tend to be viewed as a situation worse than losing one at the threshold."
Noting that there is a shift in the position of law concerning the power of the Courts to exercise judicial review of the State's contract-making decision, wherein earlier the Courts were reluctant to interfere with the contract-making decisions of the State, the bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud and also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra observed that the State cannot claim immunity from the Court's power to review its contracting decisions (having public interest) if it has an element of arbitrariness or mala fide.
“Therefore, what can be culled out from the above is that although disputes arising purely out of contracts are not amenable to writ jurisdiction yet keeping in mind the obligation of the State to act fairly and not arbitrarily or capriciously, it is now well settled that when contractual power is being used for public purpose, it is certainly amenable to judicial review.”, the Judgment authored by Justice JB Pardiwala said.
The gist of the dispute was that the Appellant was granted a Tender to undertake the maintenance and operations works of two Underpasses in the City of Kolkata. The Respondent-State had issued notice canceling the tender awarded to the Appellant without providing any reasons in terms of the contract. The tender was canceled on an extraneous ground that the Higher Officials wanted to cancel the tender.
Aggrieved by the decision of the State, the Appellant preferred a Writ Petition before the Calcutta High Court which was subsequently dismissed. Following this, the Appellant approached the Supreme Court.
According to the Court, the judicial review of an executive action can be taken if the decision is not based on valid considerations. The Court said that the question needs to be answered as to whether the decision was based on valid considerations to ensure that the reasons assigned were the true motivations behind the action.
After perusing the notice of cancellation of the tender awarded to the Appellant, the Court found that there were no reasons assigned for canceling the order, rather the orders to stop the work had been issued for an altogether different reason – i.e., handing over of the operation & maintenance of the concerned underpasses to another authority.
Internal File Noting's Having Role In Decision-Making Process Be Considered For Judicial Review
Taking a clue from the internal file notings of the respondents, the Court said that the same could be taken into consideration while exercising the power of a judicial review, if such internal file noting played a significant role in a decision-making process to cancel the tender.
“any internal discussions or notings that have been approved and formalized into a decision by an authority can be examined to ascertain the reasons and purposes behind such decisions for the overall judicial review of such decision-making process and whether it conforms to the principles enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution.”, the court said.
Unsupported Claims Of Loss To Public Exchequer Not Valid Ground To Cancel Tender
Further, the Court rejected the respondent's contention that the decision to cancel the tender was taken in the public interest to avoid loss to the public exchequer. The Court said that by no stretch it could be said to be a cogent reason for cancelling an already existing tender.
“A blanket claim by the State claiming loss of public money cannot be used to forgo contractual obligations, especially when it is not based on any evidence or examination as the larger interest of upholding contracts is also in the play.”, the Court said.
Conclusion
The Court later found the present case as a classic textbook case of an arbitrary exercise of powers by the respondent in canceling the tender that was issued in favor of the appellant and that too at the behest of none other than the concerned Minister-In-Charge.
The Court came to the findings that the Respondent's notice of cancelation of the tender is an arbitrary exercise of the power, wherein the decision to cancel the already existing tender was passed without recording reasons as per the terms of the contract but on extraneous grounds. Therefore, in the exercise of the power of judicial review, the Court quashed the notice of cancelation of the tender and set aside the decision of the High Court.
Counsels For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ateev Mathur, Adv. Mr. Ajay Monga, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Adv. Ms. Varsha Kriplani, Adv. Mr. Anmol Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ananta Prasad Mishra, AOR
Counsels For Respondent(s) Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, AOR
Case Details: SUBODH KUMAR SINGH RATHOUR VERSUS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & ORS., CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6741 OF 2024
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 455
Employee With Requisite Educational Qualification Eligible For Promotion Regardless Of Criteria Being Fulfilled Prior To Or During Service: Allahabad HC
Employee With Requisite Educational Qualification Eligible For Promotion Regardless Of Criteria Being Fulfilled Prior To Or During Service: Allahabad HC
28 Sept 2024 7:30 PM
The Allahabad High Court has held that a candidate that has the required educational qualification deserves to be promoted upon satisfying all other criteria. It was held that it is immaterial whether such criteria were fulfilled prior to the service or during it.
“….. a candidate if is already having qualification to his credit prior to entering into the service and, he is equally entitled to be considered for promotion on the post of Junior Engineer within 5% quota provided within the rules,” held Justice Ajit Kumar.
The Court held that rules of promotions are to be construed liberally to avoid stagnation in employees as well as to boost morale. Accordingly, it was held that similarly placed employees should be given similar opportunities of promotion.
Case Background
Petitioner working as Storekeeper Grade-1 under the respondent corporation. By an order dated 27.04.2017, his claim for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer was rejected stating that the 5% quota that was available for the post of Junior Engineer could only be availed by employees that fell in the category of Draftsmen/ Dresser/ Clerks/ Laboratory Assistants; who had the required diploma in engineering and had completed five years of regular service. Petitioner's request for promotion was reject on the grounds that he had acquired his diploma prior to entering the service and that did not fall in the category of employees eligible for promotion.
Challenging the rejection order, petitioner contended that the case of whether a candidate should have acquired the requisite qualification during the service period or before, was not entirely new as it had already been considered by the Allahabad High Court in Madhavendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors.
Further, he argued that the post of Storekeeper fell within the category of Group – C employees and so did the posts of Draftsemen/ Dresser/ Clerks/ Laboratory Assistants, which were eligible for promotion. Thus, the post of storekeeper was also to be considered for promotion as belonging to the same category.
High Court Verdict
On an earlier date, the Court had directed the Respondent Corporation to give details on the pay scale of the employees in question so as to establish whether the petitioner fell within the category of employees eligible for promotion. Upon perusal of the affidavit filed by the Corporation, it was held that the post of the Storekeeper was taken to be within the category of Group – C employees.
“In view of this above admitted position, it can safely (sic) concluded that post of Storekeeper falls in group 'C' category and so the posts of Storekeeper like that of Lab Assistant, Draftsmen, can be considered for promotion as Junior Engineer within 5% of quota as provided for under the relevant service rules,” held the Court.
Examining the circumstances of the appointment of the petitioner, the Court held that the only thing in its consideration was to adjudicate whether the petitioner would be entitled to be promoted in the event he had acquired qualification before entering into service. Justice Kumar held that this controversy had already been decided in the case of Madhavendra Singh.
In Madhavendra Singh, a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court had held that the requirement that a candidate should have fulfilled the required educational criteria as prescribed by the rules was intended to ensure that a candidate who was employed with the state obtained the aforementioned criteria only after seeking the permission of the state. However, the Court had held that this was not to mean that an individual who had already acquired the criteria would be barred from being granted a promotion.
“Obviously, the object and purpose is not to exclude from consideration in service candidates who have already obtained educational qualifications prescribed prior to their date of entry in service,” held the Division Bench.
The Court held that the legal principle that was to be taken into account was that one must have the requisite academic qualification of the concerned trade in order to make them eligible for the post on which the promotion had to be made. Further, it was held that the experience would only be taken into account qua the service done by an employee in a feeding cadre.
Justice Kumar held that the argument advanced by the respondent that the petitioner was not qualified for promotion because the post of Storekeeper was not mentioned in the rules, did not hold any weight. It was held that employees falling in similar or same cadres would be given the same opportunity to advance their career in service.
Accordingly, the Court held that the petitioner possessed the requisite criteria and had served for the required period under the rules. Thus, he was eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Mechanical). The Court directed the respondents to pass an appropriate order regarding promotion of the petitioner.
Case Title: Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. And 3 Ors. [WRIT - A No. - 17005 of 2018]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
கொடிகட்டிப் பறந்த எம்.ஜி.ஆர் நூற்றாண்டில் கொடிக்கும் சின்னத்துக்கும் சிதறும் அதிமுக By -திருமலை சோமு | ...
-
முடியும் என்றால் முடியும்! சென்னை மாநகரை தராசின் ஒரு தட்டிலும் எஞ்சிய மற்ற தமிழ்நாட்டுப் பகுதிகளை இன்னொரு தட்டிலும் வைத்தால் சமமாக இருக்கும்...
