LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Thursday admitted for regular hearing a petition challenging the exclusion of Chinese manufacturers in a tender for procurement of medical equipment issued by the Punjab government.
Opposing the petition on the ground of maintainability, the government’s lawyer said it was a policy matter and had been decided in accordance with law. He further said that the authorities concerned excluded China origin manufacturers because they received certain complaints against them.
The counsel on behalf of the petitioner/company, argued that the action of the respondents was against the World Trade Organization’s agreements of government of Pakistan specifically, Morocco Pakistan Round Negotiation agreements and others.
He submitted that under Article 4 of the Constitution it was an inalienable right of the petitioner to be treated as per law and no action detrimental to his property shall be taken except in accordance with law.
Solutions Engineering Pvt Ltd had filed the petition seeking a direction to the Punjab Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) to review its order and also declare null and void the tender announced by the Punjab Employment and Social Security Institution (PESSI).
The counsel contended that the petitioner being a multinational Pakistan based company having setup in UAE and China as well had been providing multi-disciplinary control engineering services, both nationally and globally since 2004.
He said the petitioner supplied machines to the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), trained the paramedical staff all over Pakistan and got an excellent performance certificate by the Infection Hospital, Islamabad.
The counsel said the petitioner challenged the bidding regarding provision of equipment i.e. anesthesia ventilator for various hospitals for the year 2021-22 and the condition regarding manufacturer countries limited to USA, Europe and Japan only by excluding the equipment of China. He said the procurement regulatory authority disposed of the application by the petitioner with vague directions.
Justice Jawad Hassan observed that the points raised in the petition needed consideration and sought replies from the respondents by Jan 19.
