The abrupt closure of public welfare outlets without justified public interest violates the doctrine of legitimate expectation and the principles of fair administrative action.

ORDER :

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA)

These Writ Petitions, clustered together, by a common thread of grievance, invite this Court to answer, the legality and propriety, of the orders dated 14-05-2025 and 02-08-2025 passed by the 1^st and 4^th respondents. By the said orders, the Janaushadhi Kendras (‘Kendra/s’ for short) – Public Welfare Outlets, established under the Pradhanmantri Bharatiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana, within the Government Hospital premises of the State are now directed to be shuttered, permissions earlier granted were withdrawn and petitioners were commanded to vacate the premises. The petitioners, in all these cases, aggrieved by what they perceive as a sudden and unreasoned volte- face by the State, seek interference at the hands of this Court through the subject petitions.

2. For the sake of convenience, the facts obtaining in W.P.No.105933 of 2025 are noticed, as the narrative is common to all these cases.

3.1. The petitioner has been operating a Kendra within the precincts of Taluk Hospital at Bhatkala, Uttara Kannada District. Since the year 2018, the petitioner has been running the Kendra with all statutory permissions, investing his resources into creating the infrastructure, stocking medicines, procuring equipment and ensuring a dignified and functional retail outlet, within the hospital premises. This is not a casual indulgence, but an endeavour undertaken pursuant to the formal agreement entered into with the State, mirroring similar agreements across the length and breadth of the State. For nearly 7 years, the Kendra/s functioned uninterrupted, rendering service to patients by supplying quality generic medicines at prices dramatically lower than the market rate, often at 50% to 80% below the maximum retail price.

3.2. When things stood thus, the impugned orders are passed which comes to this petitioner as a shock, as the orders direct immediate closure of the Kendra/s, cancellation of permission granted earlier, rejection of pending applications and eviction by a fixed date. The primary reason projected inter alia was, that the presence of the Kendra/s within the hospital premises impeded the State’s policy of supplying free medicine to the patients.

3.3. Petitions galore against the orders passed directing closure and the coordinate Benches of this Court grant interim orders of stay of the order dated 31-05-2025. Notwithstanding the interim order so granted, an office order is passed on 02-08-2025 or on different dates in other cases, directing closure of Kendra/s by revoking the permissions granted to run the Kendra/s earlier. It is on these grievances, the petitioners in all these cases, are at the doors of this Court calling in question the said action in question.

4. Heard Sri Anirudh A.Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri J.M. Gangadhar, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents 1 to 5 and Sri Venkatesh M.Kharvi, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5/6.

SUBMISSIONS:

PETITIONER’S:

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri Anirudh A. Kulkarni would vehemently contend that the policy of establishment of Kendra/s was in public interest. It was in the year 2008 the idea of opening Kendra/s of this kind began and in 2015-16 it was strengthened. The petitioner, in accordance with law, was granted 120 sq.ft. of space in a Taluka hospital for the last 7 years. He has been running the Kendra without any complaint from any quarter and is helping thousands of patients around, as high-quality generic medicine is supplied through the Kendra/s at hugely nominal price, sometimes at 80% less than MRP and in some cases to the tune of 50% less than MRP. Nonetheless, on a grossly subsidized price the medicine is being sold. He would contend that the State actually procures medicine from t