LAHORE: The Punjab government’s efforts to procure dialysis machines for teaching hospitals suffered a major blow as the health secretary blacklisted a Japan-based firm for violating the agreement.
The action was initiated against the firm when it claimed that it could not ensure supply of dialysis machines and the RO plants, claiming that its manufacturing unit had caught fire.
However, Punjab Health Secretary Azmat Mahmood rejected the reply of the firm, declaring it an insufficient response and violation of the contract.
“I, Azmat Mahmood, the Punjab specialised healthcare and medical education secretary, being competent authority, here blacklist and disqualify (m/s) Nipro Medical Care private limited Lahore) with immediate effect for a period of two years for future participation in tenders, under Rule-21 of PPR-2014 (Amended),” reads the official notification (a copy is also available with Dawn) issued by the health department.
He declared that the performance guarantee furnished by the firm was also forfeited in favour of the procuring agency as it failed to comply with the terms & conditions of the contract.
Health secretary blacklists firm for backing out of contract
An official said the government had initiated the procurement process for 95 dialysis machines costing Rs300m in March 2023, in view of the rising number of kidney patients whose life depended on dialysis.
He called it incompetence of the health authorities that failed to make the procurement deal successful, saying the public teaching hospitals across the province had demanded 95 dialysis machines immediately.
The official said a majority of the kidney-failure patients were being denied dialysis due to shortage of machines and heads of nephrology departments had declared it an urgent matter.
The process was initiated and it was almost near completion when abovementioned notification surfaced.
The official said the new tender process would take two more years or so, depriving the critical patients to avail the life-saving treatment.
The notification stated that the health department had advertised the tender for the procurement of dialysis machines and RO plants on March 22, 2023.
After completion of the procurement process, it said, a notification of award/advance acceptance of tender was issued on March 3, 2024 for provision of dialysis machines along with the accessories in favour of the firm being the successful bidder.
The firm submitted stamp duty and performance guarantee on March 29, 2024.
“Accordingly, the contract was signed between the Punjab health department and the supplying firm on May 2, 2024, requiring the firm to provide the dialysis units within a period of 150 days,” reads the notification.
The department claimed, in the notification, that a letter of credit was to be established in favour of M/S Nipro Corporation Japan (Manufacturer), requiring the submission of original proforma invoice and insurance documents in accordance with the special conditions of the contract.
“However, the supplying firm submitted only a copy of the Performa Invoice and relevant documents, including insurance documents on June 12, 2024, to proceed with the urgent opening of the Letter of Credit,” reads the notification.
It said multiple meetings were held with the firm’s representatives for resolution of the said issue but all efforts proved futile as the firm failed to submit the required documents to proceed with the execution of the contract.
Following the non-compliance, the health department issued a show-cause notice to the firm on Aug 27 but it didn’t respond.
About the firm’s response, the notification said that its representative made an appearance in a meeting when the health department issued a personal hearing notice on Sept 24.
“The firm’s director as representative, Afzal Hashmi, submitted reply wherein it was stated that due to fire incident in the factory of one of its major part manufacturers (sic),” reads the notification.
Consequently, the firm was not in a position to deliver the requisite machines in the timelines as per the contract and requested for more time to resolve the issue.
The department asked the firm to substantiate its claim of fire incident through documentary evidence.
However, the firm came up with an excuse that it was under obligations of “non-disclosure”.
The second personal hearing opportunity was also provided to the firm in October but it again failed to provide the documents as evidence, prompting the department for the major punishment, according to the official notification.
Published in Dawn, December 3rd, 2024
