Dhanani’s plea over distribution of remdesivir: Paatil cites ‘political grudge’, seeks rejection of plea in Gujarat HC

Paatil, in an affidavit filed on June 21 responding to the PIL, has submitted that “the present petition is filed with a view to ventilate political grudge and grievance” against BJP, since “petitioner and his political party are rivals in the political scenario” of Gujarat.

Referring to a para in Dhanani’s petition, Paatil’s affidavit said, “Reliance is placed upon certain newspaper reports and the so-called reply that was given by the Hon. Chief Minister” and states the petitioner ought to have verfied facts that appeared in print and electronic media from his supporters.

On April 10, on the sidelines of an event, taking questions from mediapersons Rupani had clarified the stocks of remdesivir, used in Covid treatment, procured by Paatil for Surat “is separate and is not a part of government stocks”. Rupani had said, “Concerned about Surat, C R Paatil has arranged for 5,000 Remdesivir injections. How CR (Paatil) made those arrangements, it is better to ask him for a proper answer”.

Paatil has submitted that being a senior party leader, “at the relevant point of time when there was a huge demand of remdesivir injections, oxygen etc..”, he had “mobilized…senior party workers and duly elected public representatives (Members of Legislative Assembly as well as Local Municipal Corporators) to extend maximum help and assistance for those who were in acute need of remdesivir injections and other essential supplies.” As per Paatil, “at no point in time…remdesivir injections, were kept for hoarding at any place, including the party office of Bhartiya Janta Party,” and that “availability and facilitation” of the injections were done “strictly in accordance with the statutory provisions and guidelines issued by the competent authorities.”

Last week, Surat BJP MLA Harsh Sanghavi had filed an affidavit in the matter, outlining the procurement and distribution possess followed, which involved two distributors — one in Ahmedabad and another in Surat — and two medical stores — one in Surat and another in Navsari — that according to Sanghavi, was done in accordance of law. The Gujarat FDCA in a preliminary report has also given a clean chit to BJP and its office bearers, including Sanghavi who were involved in the process. As per Sanghavi, 2,506 injections were distributed free-of-cost, facilitated by BJP, amid the peak of the second wave of Covid-19 in Gujarat. As per Sanghavi’s affidavit, two corporate entities had paid Rs 9 lakh for a part of the injections while the rest was paid for by “volunteers/social workers”.

Paatil has submitted that since Dhanani did not independently verify the media reports as is stipulated under Gujarat (Practice and Procedure for Public Interest) Litigation Rules, 2010, “a petition filed on the basis of unverified media reports,” deserves to be dismissed. It is also Paatil’s case that Dhanani being an MLA and LoP, “has the support of his staff and is an equipped person” and thus Dhanani could have approached “statutory authorities in his official capacity,” and could have sought appointment of the Governor, Chief Minister or the Health Minister “to draw attention to the alleged grievances.”

Paatil has also questioned the motive of the PIL by highlighting that the petition was filed on April 14 and there were detailed newspaper reports the next day publishing the contentions raised and allegations made, submitting that “this itself indicates that the real purpose is to malign …(Paatil and Sanghavi) as well as the political party to which they belong and also to get publicity in the media by the present petition.”