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.

The Power of a Name: Why a Woman’s Surname Should Remain Her Own

A woman’s surname is not a tradition to be surrendered—it is an identity to be honoured.

AI generated image
AI generated image

In every culture, names carry stories—childhoods, histories, places, belonging and identity.A surname is not just a word on certificates; it is a quiet record of one’s origins, the echo of generations, and the imprint of a life lived so far.


Yet tradition created a strange rule: when a woman marries, she must surrender her name—as though her identity were an object to be moved or a page rewritten for someone else’s story.This expectation is old, deeply rooted—and unnecessary.


Today, more and more women are questioning it. And rightfully so. A woman’s surname is not a temporary gift from her birth family.


A girl grows into her surname. She writes it in school, signs it on her work and uses it to build her world. Her surname becomes part of her identity long before she understands marriage.


So why should marriage demand she abandon it?Does her life before that moment become irrelevant?Does marriage erase who she was, who she is or who she hopes to be?Of course not.


Patriarchal Roots.

Historically, the practice of a woman changing her surname arose from patriarchal systems in which she was treated as property—transferred from her father’s household to her husband’s, with the surname marking that shift.We no longer live in that world. Women study, earn, build, and lead—yet this symbolic chain—the expectation to surrender her surname—still lingers.


When society says, “After marriage, change your surname,” it is not merely asking for a new spelling.It is asking for an identity shift, implying her individuality is secondary and that she must now “belong” elsewhere.That idea is not only outdated—it is disrespectful.


Why should a woman be the only one asked to change?Has anyone ever asked a groom, “Will you change your surname after marriage?”No, because society sees his identity as fixed and hers as adjustable.This disparity reveals the stereotype clearly.


If a family truly believes in equality, why is the surname conversation always one-sided?Why cannot a man take his wife’s surname, or both keep their own, or children carry either, both, or a hyphenated version?


The truth is simple:If a demand is made of only one partner, it is not equality—it is gender bias.


A woman honouring her story

Keeping her surname is not rebellion, disrespect or “attitude”.It is a woman saying, “My identity matters. My story matters. My name matters.”She preserves the memories tied to it—her parents, her childhood, her achievements, struggles and growth.She reminds the world that a woman is defined not by marital status but by the life she builds with determination, compassion and dreams.A retained surname sends a clear message: a woman is not an object to be renamed but an individual to be respected.


Partnership, not a renaming ceremony

Marriage is meant to be two people walking together—not one person bending to adjust everything, from home to habits to surname.If marriage is built on love, trust and mutual respect, why should a woman’s name become a test of commitment? Why should giving up her surname be seen as proof of devotion?Love does not erase identity. Respect does not rewrite personal history. Partnership does not ask one person to shrink so the other may remain whole.A woman keeping her surname is not rejecting her partner—she is simply honouring herself.


Redefining the norm

Across the world, women now choose to keep their surnames—doctors, teachers, entrepreneurs, artists, writers, professors, homemakers, mothers, dreamers and doers. They show the next generation that identity is non-negotiable.They teach boys that marriage is not about controlling a woman’s choices.They normalise the idea that a woman can love her partner and also love the name she grew up with. And slowly, society is changing.


Because the real question is not, “Why is she keeping her surname?”It is: “Why was she ever asked to change it?”


The practice has no logical, emotional or ethical basis; it is simply a tradition repeated without thought.And every tradition must face one test: Does it respect human dignity? If not, it must evolve.


A woman keeping her surname after marriage is not rebellion—it is evolution, self-respect and equality in its simplest form.Her surname is a poem of her past; marriage is the journey she chooses for her future. Why should one erase the other?Let her write her life with her own name—the name she was born with, grew with and stands strong with.Her surname is her story, and no story should be renamed.


(The writer is a tutor based in Thane. Views personal.)


Comments

bottom of page