IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11840 of 2009 SMT.PAYAL BANERJEE Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 11.9.2009 The petitioner submits that the agreement was entered into with her on 22.9.2006 for supply of Ambulance at the rate of Rs.480/- per day. The aforesaid agreement was signed by the Secretary and the Chairman of the Patient Welfare Society, Primary Health Centre, Gouneha, West Champaran, who happened to be the Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre and the B.D.O. of the Block. The petitioner submits that though initially the agreement was for eleven months but the same was orally extended from time to time and the payments have been made till May,2009. It is submitted that the Ambulance of the petitioner was used till 29.6.2009 on which date it met with an accident. Learned counsel submits that it would appear from Annexure-5 which is a letter of the Incharge, Medical Officer, that the petitioner in view of the accident of ambulance had supplied another Ambulance bearing Registration no.BR22-4431. He submits that the aforesaid Ambulance since then is being brought in use. The petitioner submits that in the meantime the Civil Surgeon- cum- Chief Medical Officer, Bettiah, passed an office order that one Ranjan Kumar Pandey is willing to supply his vehicle, as such he had been permitted to make an agreement for a period of six months for supplying the vehicle. The Medical Officer-cum- Chairman, Primary Health Centre, informed vide letter no.97 dated 6.8.2009 2 that though Ranjan Kumar Pandey had sent his Ambulance but he had not entered into the agreement. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.3 did not have any jurisdiction to appoint another person to supply the vehicle save and except for the intervening period as the vehicle of the petitioner met with an accident. He submits that the aforesaid Ranjan Kumar Pandey, respondent no.5, has not entered into the agreement as yet. It is asserted that the vehicle of the petitioner is being used. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this Court finds that the Ambulance supplied by the petitioner is being used since 22.9.2006. The respondent no.4 would resolve the dispute as per the guidelines of Rogi Kalyan Sansthan within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order till then the vehicle supplied by the petitioner would be used as being used from before as asserted by the petitioner, so that no patient may suffer on account of non-availability of the ambulance. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. Anilkrsinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)