9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Singh (Nova Pharma) and Mr. Rajan Sukhija (Hospimax Health Care Pvt. Ltd.) and Deputy Medical Commissioner, Employees' State Insurance Corporation ('ESIC'), alleging cartelization in respect of procurement of medicines by ESIC, in contravention of provisions of Section 3(3) of the Act. The Informant has also alleged contravention of Section 3(3) of the Act by the Commissioner ESIC, the Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, and 29 pharmaceutical companies, but has not specifically arrayed them as opposite parties in the format prescribed for filing of information. 2. The Informant is stated to be an individual residing in Delhi. 3. It is stated in the information that ESIC is a multifaceted social security scheme designed to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , due to such connivance of these opposite parties. The same may be considered as 'commission' amount under these cartels who indulge with these companies in order to get the final tender at huge over- valuations. 7. It is further stated that other government bodies also take the ESIC prices as a benchmark for their respective procurements. As per the Informant, malpractice adopted by the opposite parties has not only resulted in huge loss of public money to the government but has also made it difficult for a common man to purchase such medicines even though he is not entitled/enrolled for ESIC scheme. 8. The Informant has prayed for (a) to conduct an immediate enquiry against the masterminds and above stated agencies/companies involved i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion has taken place; and (c) other relevant details, if any. Despite service of the aforesaid order, no response was received from the Informant within the stipulated period. 11. Thereafter, the Commission considered the matter in its ordinary meeting held on 19.06.2024 and decided to grant one last opportunity to the Informant to file the requisite details as mentioned in para 10 above, latest within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of the order. However, again, no response was received from the Informant despite service of order dated 19.06.2024. 12. The Commission next considered the matter in its ordinary meeting held on 31.07.2024 and decided to pass an appropriate order in due course. 13. In the absence of response from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nders/ medicines/ parties involved in the alleged conduct. Apart from making bald allegations, the Informant has not placed on record any cogent material to enable the Commission to examine the matter. Rather, the Informant failed to provide the requisite information in spite of being accorded two opportunities. 17. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Commission finds that no prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3) of the Act is made out against any of the OPs in the instant matter. Accordingly, the information is ordered to be closed forthwith in terms of the provisions contained in Section 26(2) of the Act. Consequently, no case for grant for relief(s) as sought under Section 33 of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
