IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4946 of 2009 M/S Brawn Laboratories Limited, 4/4 Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002, through its Director. …. Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary to the Government, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Health Department Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Drug Controller, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The State Health Society, Bihar, Pariwar Kalyan Bhawan, Sheikhpura, Patna-800014, through its Executive Director. ….. Respondents. ----------- 02 18.04.2009 A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioner today annexing therewith Annexure-10, the Validity Certificate submitted by them at the time they had filed the tender, in question. The certificate is granted by the State Drug Controller, Harayana at Panchukula. The said validity certificate shows that the petitioner had duly applied for renewal of his licence for a period up to 31.12.2011. The certificate further certifies that in terms of Rules 72 and 77 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, licence would be deemed to be renewed accordingly. The writ petition has been filed assailing Annexure-1. Annexure-1 is the letter of the State Health Society, Bihar, inter alia to the petitioner stating that in view of the observations of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 17426 of 2008, as disposed of on 24.02.2009 (Annexure- 8), petitioner’s validity certificate has expired and, as such, he must submit a duly renewed drugs licence for his tender to be considered. Petitioner submits that this is totally misconceived, in view of the validity certificate, which the petitioner has filed. It is submitted, - 2 - and rightly so, in my view, that the limited validity certificates which were under consideration in that writ petition were clearly limited by time. This Court had noted the facts as aforesaid :- “……Instead of renewal certificates they had appended a limited validity certificate. These validity certificates were limited in time. By the time they came to be considered by the Technical Core Committee even the validity certificates stood expired. Thus on these facts itself they had neither a renewed license nor a valid validity certificate still the Technical Core Committee while rejecting petitioner’s application decided to permit these tenderers to produce renewal certificates of three years at the time when Rate Contract matters (Financial bids) are opened. Except for noticing this diabolical stand I say no more……” On the face of it, the case of the petitioner is entirely different. Petitioner’s validity certificate is not limited in time, it is valid up to the next renewal i.e. 31.12.2011. Petitioner is not, thus, required in the opinion of this Court to comply with Annexure-1, his tender cannot be rejected and must be duly considered. The writ petition is, thus, allowed. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)