Disposed

Joseph C.G. v. the District Level Authorisation Committee

Kerala HC16 Jan 2018WP(C)/455/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the DPSP to submit a report on the donation readiness within a week. The second respondent was ordered to forward the application immediately upon receipt. The first respondent was directed to obtain finality within three weeks of receipt. The writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to DPSP to submit report within one week; LA committee to forward application immediately upon receipt; DLA committee to grant finality within three weeks.

Joseph C.G. Vs the District Level Authorisation Committee — Kerala HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 26TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 455 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1 JOSEPH C.G. S/O. GEORGE, AGED 49 YEARS, CHULLIKKAL (H), KALATHIL TEMPLE ROAD, AROOR P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶8

2 SARIMOL, D/O. VISWANATHAN, AGED 29 YEARS, PUTHUVAL, KOMANA, AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶10

SMT.A.P.RUFAIJA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORIZATION COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPLANTATION OF HUMAN ORGANS, THRISSUR, THRISSUR, THRISSUR MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, POST THRISSUR - 680 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶13

2. LOCAL APPROVAL COMMITTEE OF ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL LTD., ERNAKULAM - 682 016, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶14

3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALAPPUZHA, POST ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 001.

¶15

R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 455 of 2018 (F)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXHIBIT P1. THE TRUE COPY OF IDENTIFICATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER AND HER MOTHER DATED 09.10.2017 EXHIBIT P2. THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MANAGER OF THE PALACE CONVENTION CENTRE, CHANDIROOR DATED 20.10.2017 EXHIBIT P3. THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT DATED 20.11.2017 EXHIBIT P4. THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY PRESIDENT OF AROOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 20.10.2017 EXHIBIT P5. THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 08.11.2017 EXHIBIT P6. THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 08.11.2017 EXHIBIT P7. THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 08.11.2017

¶21

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

dlk

P.A. TO JUDGE

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

W.P.(C) No.455 of 2018

¶27

Dated this the 16^th day of January, 2018

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

First petitioner is a kidney patient and he is undergoing treatment at Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam. According to the petitioners, it is found that both the kidneys of the first petitioner is in dangerous condition, and therefore, the only way out possible is urgent transplantation. Since the kidney of close relatives of the first petitioner are not suitable, second petitioner informed her readiness to donate her kidney to the first petitioner. In accordance with the provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, the approval of the fist respondent is required. There upon, petitioner has submitted application before the second respondent, who is to forward the application after necessary enquiry and securing the report from the third respondent. According to the petitioner there is considerable delay on part

¶30

W.P.(C) No.455 of 2018

¶31

¶32

of the second and third respondents in processing the application and forward it to the first respondent for permission. It is thus seeking appropriate direction, this writ petition is filed.

¶33

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader, there will be a direction to the third respondent to submit a report in accordance with law before the second respondent within a week, if already a request is made by the second respondent, and if request is not made by the second respondent, the same shall be made at the earliest possible time and at any rate within a week. The second respondent shall forward the application immediately on receipt of a report from the third respondent, and a finality shall be attained by the first respondent within three weeks from the date of receipt of the report.

¶34

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶37

dlk/16/1/

Joseph C.G. v. the District Level Authorisation Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph C.G. v. the District Level Authorisation Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeev Kumar M.R Vs the Sub Divisional Magistrate

Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Limited Vs the Special Tahsildar

Sadanandan T.K. Vs State of Kerala

Leela Jackson Vs Jose Mathew

K.P.Anildev Vs Cochin International Airport

Devadas Varma.R Vs Kerala Water Authority