BENGALURU: The Siddaramaiah government has faced a significant administrative and political setback as the Dharwad High Court quashed its May 14 order directing the closure of Jan Aushadhi Kendras operating inside government hospital premises in Karnataka. A single-judge bench, headed by Justice M Nagaprasanna, passed an oral order nullifying the state government’s directive and reinstating the functioning of these centres. The ruling has not only embarrassed the state administration but also raised questions about the procedural lapses and policy planning of the Siddaramaiah government.
Background of the controversy
Earlier this year, the Karnataka government had issued a circular mandating the closure of Pradhan Mantri Jan Aushadhi Centers located within government hospitals. The official rationale provided was that government hospitals already supply free medicines to patients, rendering the operation of these centers unnecessary. According to the government, the move would streamline medicine distribution and reduce redundancy. However, the directive targeted only centers within hospital premises, leaving Jan Aushadhi Kendras outside hospitals unaffected.
The decision immediately drew criticism from petitioners, led by Rakesh Mahalingappa L and others, who filed a case challenging the order. They argued that the closures were abrupt, implemented without prior consultation, notification, or consideration of public interest. The petitioners maintained that even a small Jan Aushadhi Kendra plays a crucial role in providing affordable medicines to patients, supplementing hospital supplies, and ensuring wider access to essential drugs.
Legal arguments and government defense
The petitioners’ counsel emphasized that each Jan Aushadhi Kendra operates legally, with proper licenses, infrastructure, staff, equipment, and medicine stock. Shutting down these centers arbitrarily, they argued, violates the right to livelihood under Article 19(1)(g) and the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The lawyers highlighted that the government has always ensured the provision of free medicines to hospital patients, and a small Jan Aushadhi Kendra cannot be considered an obstacle to public healthcare delivery.
On the other hand, the state government’s counsel defended the closure, claiming that hospital-based centers were redundant, as the hospitals themselves could supply free medicines to patients. They maintained that the move would help rationalize resources and reduce administrative overlap. However, the government could not convincingly justify why prior consultation, or a phased approach was not considered, leading the court to question the legality and procedural propriety of the May 14 order.
High Court judgment
After considering the arguments, Justice M. Nagaprasanna ruled that the government order was illegal and unconstitutional. The court quashed the May 14 directive and directed that all Jan Aushadhi Centers within government hospitals continue to operate. The judgment emphasized that government actions affecting public services must be backed by proper consultation, due process, and consideration of constitutional rights.
The court ruling represents a major setback for the Siddaramaiah government, undermining its authority in policy implementation and highlighting lapses in administrative planning. The government’s failure to consult stakeholders before issuing the closure order exposed it to legal challenge and public criticism. It also raises questions about the government’s approach to balancing healthcare delivery and public access to affordable medicines.
Comments