IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38113 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. A.T. JAMEELA, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.A.T. ABDUL HAMED, AMBALATH VEETIL THEKKUMPURATH HOUSE, ORUMANAYOOR.P.O, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. 2. RATHEESH, PADINGARATHARA, PADA NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORISATION COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPLANTATION OF HUMAN ORGANS, FOR THE DISTRICT OF THRISSUR, PALAKKAD, MALAPPURAM, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, MEDICAL COLLEGE.P.O, THRISSUR. 2. DR. RAMLA BEEVI, PRINCIPAL AND FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORISATION COMMITTEE OF ALAPPUZHA AND ERNAKULAM, T.D. MEDICAL COLLEGE, VANDANAM.P.O, ALAPPUZHA - 688 005. 3. DIRECTOR, CHAIRMAN, LOCAL APPROVAL COMMITTEE OF ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION, MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL, KOCHI -16. 4. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, O/O THE DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 38113 of 2010 L ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T First petitioner is the recipient and the second petitioner is the donor of kidney. According to the petitioners, enclosing Exts.P1 to P9, they made applications to the third respondent and who, in turn, submitted the same to the second respondent for permission as provided under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994. It is stated that, subsequently, by Ext.P10, certain defects were pointed out, which were cured and the documents were resubmitted as per Ext.P11. It is stated that, at that stage, jurisdiction over the third respondent was transferred to the first respondent as per Ext.P12 Government Order and thereafter, the first respondent issued Ext.P13, requiring the petitioner to take back the documents submitted and resubmit the same again. It is at that stage, this writ petition is filed, complaining that inordinate delay is caused in granting the permission as W.P.(C) No.38113/2010 : 2 : required under the aforesaid Act. 2. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions in the matter. According to the learned Government Pleader, although the applications were submitted by the petitioners to the second respondent, on the issuance of Ext.P12 order transferring jurisdiction to the first respondent, some of the documents, which were submitted by the petitioners, were received by the first respondent and that, in that situation Ext.P13 communication happened to be issued to the petitioners. It is submitted that, once the entire documents are received, the first respondent will consider the application made by the petitioners, in the light of the documents produced and a decision in the matter will be taken without any delay. 3. From the submissions thus made by the learned Government Pleader, it is, therefore, obvious that a final decision in the matter has not been taken by the first respondent and the reason appears to be that the first W.P.(C) No.38113/2010 : 3 : respondent has not received the entire documents submitted by the petitioners to the second respondent. Therefore, at this stage, what is required is that the second respondent should transmit all the documents submitted by the petitioners to the first respondent and on receipt thereof, the first respondent should take a final decision on the application submitted by the petitioners, without any delay in the matter. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- (1) On production of a copy of this judgment, the second respondent shall transmit all the records pertaining to the applications made by the petitioners to the first respondent. (2) On receipt of the documents as above, or if all the records have already been received, it is directed that the first respondent shall consider the applications made by the petitioners and pass orders thereon, immediately on receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) No.38113/2010 : 4 : Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment and writ petition before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks