IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI. WP(PIL) NO: 65 OF 2025 Between: U Ravi Teja, S/o U.Madhu Hindu, Aged about 31 years, Occ: Student R/o D.No.21-9/2-24, Bhavi Street, Madhura Nagar, Vijayawada, Krishna District Andhra Pradesh - 520 011 ... Petitioner .,^- AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Supply and Sanitation Department, A.P Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 2. Andhra Pradesh Medical Services and Infrastructure Development Corporation (Formerly, APHMHIDC) (An Enterprise of Govt, of A.P.) 2nd Floor, Plot No.09, Survey No. 49, IT Park Mangalagiri, Guntur District- 522503 Rep.by its Managing Director 3. Dr. N.T.R Vaidya Seva Trust, Government of Andhra Pradesh Door No. 241, MGM Capital Building Chinnakakani,Mangalagiri, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh - 522 503 Rep.by its Chief Executive Officer ... Respondents^ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may. be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the to issue appropriate writ order or orders or direction or directions particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Tender No 6.1/APMSIDC/2024-25, dated 31-01- 2025, as far as the conditions viz. a) allocation of 25 marks for the technical presentation, b) allocation of 1 mark upto 75 nos., 3 marks for 75 to 100 nos, and marks above 100 nos, for experience in the provision of medical care through doctors in mmus, c) requirement of ISO 9001 2015, Bio- Medical Clinical Waste, (Authorization/Certificate of Registration for operating the Allopathic Medical Care Establishments by any State/central government/agency), and Drug License with Non- Conviction Certificate (Registration under the Drug License Control Authority and Non-Conviction certificate from the Drug Authorities Drugs 8 and Cosmetics Establishment Act 1940), and d) Operations and Maintenance Scope of Work - Any other service recommended for adding up in scope after MoLF will be at extra cost to service provider as arbitrary illegal unconstitutional and consequentially recall the tender No.6.1/APMSIDC/2024-25, dated 31-01- 2025, by calling for the entire record, culminating into incorporation of aforesaid impugned clauses, and consequentially direct the respondents to modify the aforesaid impugned tender clauses. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in pursuant to Tender No. 6.1/SRI C VENKAT REDDY, SC FOR APMSIDC/2024-25 evaluations and all constitutional actions thereof, pending disposal of the above writ petition (PIL). - Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP - Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW The Court made the following order: APHC010156532025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3483] I WP(PIL) NO: 65/2025 Between: U. Ravi Teja ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 16.04.2025 ORDER fPer Sri Justice Ravi Cheemalapati) This writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has been filed questioning allocation of marks for possessing certain qualifications and specifying certain requirements in Tender NO.6.1/APMSIDC/2024-25 , dated 31.01.2025, being arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and consequently to modify the impugned tender clauses. 2. The case of petitioner, in brief, is that respondent no.2-the Andhra Pradesh Medical Services & Infrastructure Development Corporation (APMSIDC) issued Tender for identification of Service Provider for Operation ^^((PIL) ^To. 65 of2025 2 and Maintenance of 108 Ambulances, 104 Mobile Medical Units and Emergency Response Centre in the State of Andhra Pradesh. In the said tender, vide clause no. 12.3.1, 25 hnarks are. allocated for technical presentation on methodology and approach for overall implementation of integrated 108 and 104 services. That vide clause no.12.3.7, marks are allocated for experience in the provision of Medical Care through doctors in MMUs, based on number of doctors on payrolls. ISO 9001:2015, Bio-Medical Waste,Clinical That possessing Establishment (Authorization/ Certificate of Registration for operating the Allopathic Medical Care Establishments by any State/central government/agency) and Drug licence with Non-Conviction Certificate (Registration under the Drug License Control Authority and Non-Conviction certificate from the Drug Authorities Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 is made mandatory. That allocation of 25 marks to technical presentation is highly excessive and the same creates room for arbitrary scoring, favouritism and potential bias. Further, allocation of marks for having number of doctors on payrolls has legal nexus with the operation of 108 Emergency Medical Service, which fundamentally is an emergency response service. no WPffPIL) 5Vb. 55 of2025 3 That requirement of registrations and certifications mentioned in the tender are needed for Mobile Medical Unit but not for Emergency Medical Services. That clause no. 5.6.36 that any other service recommended after adding up in scope after Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will be at extra cost to service provider, is ambiguous and the same may lead to uncertainty in the scope of services in the future. Therefore, the clauses and requirements supra mentioned are to be modified. Hence, the writ petition. ' 3. Heard Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned senior counsel, for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Medical, Health & Family Welfare. 4. Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, learned senior counsel, reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit, would contend that allocation of 25 marks for technical presentation would lead to nefarious practices of showing favouritism, bias and manipulation of evaluation process to favour a pre determined bidder, whereas allocation of marks for having doctors on payrolls and requirement of registration and certifications has no nexus with the ) Wo. 65 of2025 4 subject tender. Therefore, the tender conditions impugned are to be modified. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health justified the conditions impugned in the tender and submitted that the tenderer must have free hand in setting terms of the tender and the conditions of the tender is not open for any judicial scrutiny unless are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide. He would further contend that the petitioner could establish none of the contingencies that are required for modification of the conditions and therefore, the writ petition is meritless and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. The subject tender was issued by APMSIDC in order to procure integrated services related to Operations and Maintenance of Emergency Response Services (108), Mobile Medical Units (104) and Emergency Response Center. 7. 108 ambulance services, mobile medical units and Emergency Response Center are crucial for public health, providing accessible and timely emergency medical care, especially in remote areas. They significantly reduce mortality rates, improve access to healthcare, and play a vital role in coordinating emergency responses. y^:a<^‘RCj M^(TIL) 5Vb. 65 of2025 5 8. The authority initiating a tender process has the primary responsibility and discretion to set the terms and conditions of the tender. This includes defining eligibility criteria, evaluation methods, and other relevant aspects. While courts generally avoid interfering in tender matters, they may review the process if it's deemed arbitrary, discriminatory, or lacks public interest. 9. It is fairly settled that, generally, courts are hesitant to interfere with decisions that require specialized knowledge or expertise, especially those made by expert bodies or government agencies. This principle of judicial restraint stems from the understanding that courts may lack the specific technical or professional expertise necessary to adequately review such decisions. Interference is usually only warranted when there's clear evidence of iliegality, arbitrariness, or procedural impropriety. 10. As per the introduction, the subject tender came to be issued to improve the existing 108 Ambulance Services, Mobile Medical Units and Emergency response Center duly attending the short comings identified by the Principal Accountant General and to revamp them. It would also state that Request for Proposal (RFP) is culmination of suggestions received from the Heads of the Department Committee on Health, Government of Andhra Pradesh. :h:cj<^‘RC3 TMP(<PIL) 5Vb. 63 of2025 6 11. Clause 5 of RFP specifies the scope of integrated operation and maintenance. Generally, authority would invite tenders specifying qualifications and imposing conditions Compatible with desired nature and scope of work. Therefore, this Court is reluctant to interfere with the terrhs and conditions of the Request for Proposal. 12 The allegations that allocation of marks would create room for arbitrary scoring, favouritism and potential bias are purely imaginary. 13. In view of the above, this writ petition devoid merit and the same deserves dismissal. 14. Accordingly, the Writ Petition (PIL) is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to M/s Leo Law Associates LLP [OPUC] GP For Medical Health FW, High Court Of Andhra- 2. TwoCCsto Pradesh. [OUT] 3. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:16/04/2025 ORDER WP(PIL).No.65 of 2025 g 1J JUN 2025 o\ m to ^^SPATC\^S DISMISSING THE WP(PIL) WITHOUT COSTS