Will withdraw circular putting verification onus on hospitals in organ transplant cases: Maha govt to HC

Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni for the state government said that it will withdraw the circular and come up with a new one “as it does not want to leave a small window for poor people to be exploited by hospital doctors for sale of their organs.”

The HC said that the notification will need to be withdrawn and redrafted, adding that Kumbhakoni “fairly submitted” that it needs “fine tuning”. Granting the state the time to come up with new notification, the court posted the matter for further hearing on May 5.

A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Madhav J Jamdar was hearing a plea by Association of Hospitals, Pune, argued through advocate S R Nargolkar, which had challenged the April 11 notification of state government.

The petitioner had sought stay on the notification as interim relief and submitted that it was not the responsibility of the hospitals to verify the authenticity of the documents of the donee (recipient) or the donor since the said exercise is required to be performed by the Regional Authorisation Committee under Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994 and subsequent Rules of 1995. However, as a matter of precaution, a few hospitals, after the committee’s nod, verify documents on their own despite not being required to do so.

The association added that hospitals and doctors can ascertain compatibility of the donors and donee but cannot verify their identity or whether there is any money transaction between them. Therefore, the state cannot “fasten the liability of the same on hospitals” through the impugned notification, it added.

In response, the state government stated that while the authorisation committees will continue with their duties, the notification added a “filter” at local institution committee-level to examine genuineness of documents submitted for organ transplants, which can later be evaluated by state-level panel.

Kumbhakoni had initially opposed the plea and had argued that the state government wanted to make all hospitals accountable not only for surgery but also for all other activities on their premises in the light of a few alleged rackets between doctors and hospitals pertaining to organ transplant. However, the bench noted that authorisation committees were required to verify whether the documents were genuine.

After the petitioner association submitted that the hospitals may not agree to undertake organ transplants with such conditions imposed, the HC had said that the state government may be “depriving a large section of society from services of hospitals due to its directives.”

The state government submitted that it will withdraw the circular and come up with a newly revised notification, which the court accepted.

Earlier, while hearing a plea by Grant Medical Foundation’s Ruby Hall Clinic, a renowned hospital in Pune, the Court had stayed the April 11 communication sent by state Director of Health Services, by which the petitioner’s licence for operation of human organ/tissue transplantation mechanism had been suspended.

Disposing of hospital’s plea on April 22, the HC had continued the stay on April 11 communication against the Pune Hospital till the state health minister, who is an appellate authority, decides the appeal within 10 days of its filing. It said the relief would continue for another 10 days in case an adverse order is passed against the hospital.