IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 5406 of 2009(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ 1. AMMED, S/O.LATE KOYAKUTTY, AGED 55 YEARS NEELIYADUTH HOUSE,CHERANDATHUR PO PUTHUPANAM VIA, VADAKARA , CALICUT. 2. PRASANTH NAIR, S/O.RAJAPPAN NAIR AGED 28 YEARS, THEKKEPARA HOUSE P.O.PZHAMATTAM, ERNAKULAM. 3. SHAFI, S/O.KUNHAMMU, AGED 29 YEARS CHAKKALIPARAMBIL HOUSE, THIRUNAVAYA PO.ANANTHAVOOR, MALAPPURAM. 4. BABURAJAN, S/O.LATE KURIYAPPAN, AGED 44 YEARS, KULANGARA HOUSE, PATHIRAMANGALAM P.O.VELLARAKKAD, THRISSUR. 5. MATHEW M.CHERIAN, S/O.M.M.CHERIAN AGED 45 YEARS, SHARON VILLA, 9-ADITHYA LANE POEDIKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. BALMEENAKSHI, W/O.SUKUMARAN, AGED 54 YEARS, SUJA NILAYAM, THAIKKATTUSSERI PO,THRISSUR. 7. REJEEV BABU, S/O.RAVEENDRAN ,AGED 30 YEARS, RAJ VIHAR, PARIMADAN, NEW MAHE, KANNUR. 8. MOHAMMED BASHEER, S/O.AALI, AGED 30 YEARS, CHENGADAN HOUSE, ULLANNUR PO,PALATHINGAL PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE AUTHORISATION COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN ORGAN TANSPLANTATION OF KERALA,(CENTRAL AUTHORISATION COMMITTEE) CENTRAL ZONE, KOTTAYAM RERPESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,THE PRINCIPAL MEDICAL COLLEGE, GANDHINAGAR PO,KOTTAYAM 686 008. WPC NO.5406/09 -2- 2. THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY (APPOINTED UNDER THE TANSPLANTATION HUMAN ORGAN ACT,RERPESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATIION THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE VIGILANCE & ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU OFFICE OF THE VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 6. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEALTH AND AMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. THE WEST FORT HI-TECH HOSPITAL LTD P.B.NO.930 ,PUNKUNNAM, THRISSUR 680 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 8. MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL, MANAGED BY PULIKKAL MEDICAL FOUNDATION, M.G.ROAD, PALLIMUKKU, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN -16 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 9. LAKESHORE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD., LAKESHORE HOSPITAL, N.H.47 BY-PASS, MARAD, NETOOR P.O, COCHIN 682 304, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI FOR R9 SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R8 SRI.M.S.KALESH FOR R8 SRI.HARISH GOPINATH FOR R8 SRI.V.VINAY MENON FOR R8 SMT.KVP.JAYALEKSHMY FOR R8 SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) FOR R8 SMT.M.C.SHIJIMOL FOR R8 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 5406 OF 2009 (U) ==================== Dated this the 4th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Sri.R.S.Kalkura appears for the 8th respondent and Smt.Sumathi Dandapani appears for the 9th respondent and were heard. 2. The petitioners are patients suffering from serious kidney disorders and other diseases. It would appear that they were awaiting kidney transplantation in accordance with the provisions of Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994. According to the petitioners, they are the patients of the 7th respondent hospital. The hospital was having a registration under the Act, authorising transplantation of human organs. It is also stated that the 1st respondent, the Authorisation Committee constituted under Section 9(4)(b) of the Act also have granted approval in favour of the petitioners for undergoing the kidney transplantation in the 7th respondent hospital. 3. However, it would appear that the registration granted to the 7th respondent hospital has since expired and has not been renewed. On account of this, as it became impossible for the WPC 5406/09 :2 : petitioners to undergo the surgery at the 7th respondent hospital, this writ petition was filed by them praying that the 2nd respondent be directed to grant renewal of registration to the 7th respondent hospital so that the treatment process could be completed. 4. Since the 7th respondent hospital did not come forward to agitate their entitlement for continued registration, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter. On instructions, it is now reported that there were complaints against the hospital and that an enquiry is pending. It is informed that in view of the pendency of the proceedings against the 7th respondent, the registration was declined to be renewed. At that stage, petitioners filed application for impleadment of respondents 8 and 9, two hospitals in Cochin, which have also been granted registration for transplantation of human organs in terms of the Act referred to above. This was for the reason that since transplantation at the 7th respondent hospital has become impossible, arrangements for the surgery of the petitioners could be made in the hospitals referred to above. 5. Today, counsel appearing for the aforesaid hospitals have submitted that they are wiling to provide the treatment to the WPC 5406/09 :3 : petitioners, provided, the petitioners are willing to comply with the procedural formalities. 6. At that stage, one difficulty pointed out by the counsel for the petitioners is that the approval granted to them by the 1st respondent was in favour of the 7th respondent and therefore the 1st respondent should be directed to grant approval in favour of the 8th and 9th respondents, in which event only, the petitioners can undergo their surgery in those hospitals. On this submission, I heard the learned Government Pleader also. 7. In view of the fact that approval has already been granted in favour of the 7th respondent and since the 7th respondent does not enjoy registration, it is directed that it will be open to the petitioners to approach the Chair Person of the 1st respondent, in which case, the Chair Person shall issue proceedings granting approval to the petitioners in favour of respondents 8 and 9 hospitals, depending upon the preference indicated by the petitioners. It is directed that further meeting of the Authorisation Committee need not be convened for this purpose. 8. It is directed that necessary orders shall be passed WPC 5406/09 :4 : immediately on production of a copy of this judgment. 9. On production of such approval before respondents 8 and 9 and subject to the petitioners satisfying other conditions, the respondents 8 and 9 shall immediately proceed with the treatment as desired by the petitioners. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp