top of page

By:

Rajendra Joshi

3 December 2024 at 3:50:26 am

Procurement first, infrastructure later

Procurement at multiples of market price; equipment before infrastructure; no accountability Kolhapur: Maharashtra’s Medical Education and Public Health Departments have been on an aggressive drive to expand public healthcare infrastructure. Daily announcements of new centres, advanced equipment and expanded services have reassured citizens long denied dependable public healthcare. Procurement of medical equipment, medicines and surgical supplies is reportedly being undertaken at rates two to...

Procurement first, infrastructure later

Procurement at multiples of market price; equipment before infrastructure; no accountability Kolhapur: Maharashtra’s Medical Education and Public Health Departments have been on an aggressive drive to expand public healthcare infrastructure. Daily announcements of new centres, advanced equipment and expanded services have reassured citizens long denied dependable public healthcare. Procurement of medical equipment, medicines and surgical supplies is reportedly being undertaken at rates two to ten times higher than prevailing market prices. Basic economics dictates that bulk government procurement ought to secure better rates than private buyers, not worse. During the Covid-19 pandemic, equipment and consumables were procured at five to ten times the market rate, with government audit reports formally flagging these irregularities. Yet accountability has remained elusive. The pattern is illustrated vividly in Kolhapur. The Dean of Rajarshi Shahu Government Medical College announced that a PET scan machine worth Rs 35 crore would soon be installed at Chhatrapati Pramilaraje (CPR) Government Hospital for cancer diagnosis. But a comparable machine is available in the market for around Rs 6.5 crore. A senior cancer surgeon at a major cancer hospital in western Maharashtra, where a similar machine was recently installed, remarked that the gap between what his hospital paid and what the government is reportedly paying was enough to make one ‘feel dizzy’. The label of a ‘turnkey project’ does not adequately explain a price differential of this magnitude. High Costs CPR Hospital recently had a state-of-the-art IVF centre approved at a sanctioned cost of Rs 7.20 crore. Senior fertility specialists across Maharashtra note that even a modern IVF centre with advanced reproductive technology equipment typically costs between Rs 2.5 crore and Rs 3 crore. The state’s outlay is reportedly approaching Rs 15 crore. Equipment arrived in June 2025 and lay idle for months owing to indecision about the site. Similarly, digital X-ray machines approved for CPR Hospital and a government hospital in Nanded; available in the market for roughly Rs 1.5 crore; were reportedly procured at Rs 9.98 crore per unit. Doctors in CPR’s radiology department, apprehensive about being drawn into potential inquiries, reportedly resisted accepting the equipment. One departmental head was transferred amid disagreements over signing off on the proposal. What’s Wrong These cases point to a deeper structural failure: Maharashtra has perfected what might be called the ‘equipment first, infrastructure later’ model. In any public hospital, the administrative sequence ought to be: identify space, create infrastructure, sanction specialist posts, and only then procure equipment. Compounding the procurement paradox is a parallel policy decision. On 20 December 2025, the state government decided to introduce radiology diagnostic services through a Public-Private Partnership model (PPP). Following this, an order issued on 6 February 2026 authorised private operators to provide PET scan, MRI and CT scan services at six government medical college hospitals: in Pune, Kolhapur, Miraj, Sangli, Mumbai and Baramati. CPR already has a 126-slice CT scan machine and a 3 Tesla MRI scanner, with another CT scan proposed. If the PPP arrangement proceeds, the hospital could simultaneously run one PET scan machine, two MRI scanners and three CT scan machines. Medical experts warn this could lead to unnecessary diagnostic testing simply to keep machines occupied, thus exposing patients to excess radiation while government-owned equipment gathers dust. A similar pattern was seen during the pandemic, when the Medical Education Department spent hundreds of crores on RT-PCR machines, only to award swab-testing contracts to a private company. Many of those machines remain unused today.

Talent Thrust into the Fire

Shubman Gill’s rapid rise to India’s ODI captaincy in late 2025 was billed as the beginning of a bold new chapter for Indian cricket. At just 26, the elegant Punjab batsman had already carved out an impressive resume: a Test average above 50, consistent big scores in white-ball cricket, and a reputation as one of the most technically sound stroke-makers in the modern game. His appointment came on the heels of Rohit Sharma’s retirement from limited-overs formats following India’s successful Champions Trophy campaign in early 2025, where Rohit had led with trademark composure. The BCCI, under chief selector Ajit Agarkar and in consultation with head coach Gautam Gambhir, saw Gill as the natural long-term successor, fast-tracking him to prepare for the 2027 ODI World Cup in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Namibia. Yet, mere months into the role, the initial excitement has given way to intense scrutiny, with a string of disappointing results prompting debates about whether the transition was rushed.


Gill’s ODI captaincy journey began inauspiciously with a three-match series against Australia in October 2025. The opener in Perth was a rain-marred affair reduced to 26 overs, where India lost by seven wickets under the DLS method. Gill managed just 10 runs off 18 balls, undone by the relentless pace of Mitchell Starc and Josh Hazlewood. The second match saw another collapse under pressure, sealing a 2-1 series defeat despite a dominant consolation win in the third ODI at Sydney, chasing down the target with nine wickets to spare. This made Gill only the second Indian captain after Virat Kohli to lose his debut ODI as skipper, highlighting the brutal initiation he faced in a high-stakes away series.


The situation deteriorated further in January 2026 during the home series against New Zealand. What was expected to be a routine assignment against a transitional Kiwi side turned into a historic setback: New Zealand’s first-ever bilateral ODI series victory on Indian soil. India took the first ODI in Vadodara by four wickets, chasing 301 with composure. However, New Zealand bounced back emphatically in the second at Rajkot, winning by seven wickets after posting a competitive total. The decider in Indore proved decisive—New Zealand amassed 337/8, powered by centuries from Daryl Mitchell (137) and Glenn Phillips (106), before bowling India out for 296 despite Virat Kohli’s valiant 124. The 41-run loss completed a 2-1 series defeat, leaving fans and experts stunned.


In six ODIs as captain, Gill’s record stands at two wins and four losses—a win percentage of just 33.33 per cent, a sharp contrast to India’s historical dominance in the format and Rohit’s roughly 75 per cent success rate over 56 matches. Critics have zeroed in on tactical shortcomings: sluggish powerplay bowling, delayed changes, questionable field placements, and a perceived lack of aggression. Former players like Ajinkya Rahane pointed to missed opportunities in the Indore game, where spinners Kuldeep Yadav and Ravindra Jadeja were underutilized while part-timers bowled more overs. Commentators such as Ian Smith noted Gill appearing “out of ideas” during key partnerships, and Simon Doull criticised his passivity. Social media and platforms like Reddit have echoed this, branding him a “weak captain,” with some fans even demanding his removal following poor domestic Ranji Trophy outings (0 and 14 in one match). Calls have surfaced to reinstate Rohit Sharma, with former cricketer Manoj Tiwary questioning why the BCCI moved on from a proven winner so soon after a major title.


Gill’s personal form offers a silver lining. Since assuming captaincy, he has averaged over 50 in ODIs (though some reports note a dip to around 29-30 in captaincy games compared to pre-captaincy highs near 59), demonstrating resilience under pressure. His batting remains a cornerstone, providing stability at the top. There are also encouraging signs for the future: backing young bowlers like Harshit Rana, who has shown promise, and all-rounder Nitish Kumar Reddy, who contributed usefully in the New Zealand series. Gill’s Test captaincy, starting mid-2025 after Rohit and Kohli’s retirements from the format, has shown more promise—a hard-fought 2-2 draw in England, including a century in the opener—suggesting multi-format leadership could hone his skills faster, akin to Kohli’s growth.


However, captaincy demands more than runs; it requires aura, decisiveness, and the ability to inspire in crises—qualities Rohit exuded calmly and Kohli fiercely. Gill, with limited prior experience (sporadic IPL stints with Gujarat Titans reaching playoffs but no titles, plus brief T20I captaincy), appears to lack that intangible edge. The BCCI’s choice seems driven by batting pedigree and long-term vision rather than extensive leadership credentials, raising questions of favouritism over merit in a results-oriented sport.


Looking forward, redemption lies in upcoming challenges: tours, the 2026 Asia Cup, and building toward 2027. Consistent series wins could quiet critics and allow Gill to mature. Persistent struggles, though, might force a rethink—perhaps elevating KL Rahul or Suryakumar Yadav.


Gill is undeniably talented, a generational batsman with poise and potential. But talent alone rarely lifts trophies; leadership must match it. For now, his ODI captaincy remains a high-stakes experiment—full of promise yet perilously close to unravelling if results don’t improve soon.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page