Disposed

Hussan P.P v. the District Level Authorization Comittee

Kerala HC7 Dec 2020WP(C)/26804/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by a kidney patient and his family. The court directed the Local Approval Committee to forward the application to the District Level Authorization Committee upon receipt of documents, and to examine and decide the matter within one month under Section 9(3) of the THOAT Act.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to forward the application to the 1st respondent within three days and to decide the matter within one month from receipt of the judgment.

Hussan P.P Vs the District Level Authorization… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.26804 OF 2020(A)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 HUSSAN P.P AGED 67 YEARS

¶8

S/O. PAREETH, PUTHIYEDATHUKUNNEL HOUSE, PERUMPILLICHIRA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶9

2 JISHA

¶10

AGED 42 YEARS

¶11

D/O. JALALUDHEEN P.K., PARUTHIYEZHATH HOUSE, PERUMALPADI, ELANKUNNAPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORIZATION COMITTEE FOR TRANSPLANTATION OF HUMAN ORGANS, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, KALAMASSERY, PIN683 104, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶15

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

¶16

3 THE DEPUTY SUPERITENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA, ALUVA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-683 101

¶17

R1 & R3 BY ADV.SMT.VINITHA.B. GP, R2 BY ADV.SRI.R.S.KALKURA,SC

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No.26804 OF 2020(A)

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Dated this the 7th day of December 2020

¶23

The 1^st petitioner is a kidney patient,

¶24

undergoing treatment in Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam. It is stated that he is advised to have

¶25

kidney transplantation at the earliest. It is also stated that since the kidneys of the close relatives of the 1^st petitioner are not available for transplantation, the 2^nd petitioner come forward to donate her kidney. The petitioners stated that though they have submitted Ext.P9 application along with all documents, the 2^nd respondent is not forwarding the same.

¶26

The learned Counsel for the 2^nd respondent, Sri.R.S. Kalkura, submits that the petitioners are yet to produce all the documents and that eight more documents are to be furnished.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the

¶28

¶29

WP(C).No.26804 OF 2020(A)

¶30

petitioners submitted that all the documents would be produced immediately.

¶31

In that event, immediately on receipt of

¶32

the said documents, the 2^nd respondent shall forward the application along with all the documents to the

¶33

1^st respondent. Transplantation of kidney from unrelated donors is governed by Section 9(3) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 and Rule 7 Clause 3 of the Transplantation of

¶34

Human Organs and Tissues Rules 2014. The 1^st

¶35

respondent is the authority constituted for examining the application for transplantation of

¶36

kidney, when the donor is not related to the patient, in accordance with the provisions

¶37

contained in the Act and Rules. Therefore, the

¶38

Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd

¶39

respondent to forward Ext.P9 application to the 1^st respondent along with all the documents within a

¶40

period of three days from the date of receipt of

¶41

all the documents from the petitioners. There shall be a further direction to the 1^st respondent

¶42

WP(C).No.26804 OF 2020(A)

¶43

¶44

to examine the said application along with the relevant documents after obtaining a report from the 3^rd respondent and to take a decision in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 9(3) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 as well as Rule 7(3) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules 2014, as expeditiously as possible, taking note of the condition of the 1^st petitioner also, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶45

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶46

Sd/P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶47

¶48

WP(C).No.26804 OF 2020(A)

¶49

¶50

APPENDIX

¶51

PETITIONERS'S EXHIBITS:

¶52

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY BEFORE THE 28.11.2020	OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY BY THE PRESI GRAMA PANCHAYAT	OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED DENT OF KUMARAMANGALAM H DATED 20.10.2020
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY BY THE PRESIDE PANCHAYATH DATE	OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED NT, ELANKUNNAPUZHA GRAMA D 22.10.2020
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY	OF THE IDENTIFICATION
	CERTIFICATE O HUSBAND DATED 1	F THE DONOR AND HER 6.10.2020
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE COPY CERTIFICATE OF DATED 16.10.202	OF THE IDENTIFICATION THE DONOR AND HER MOTHER 0
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE COPY THE PETITIONERS	OF THE JOINT AFFIDAVIT OF DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY THE HUSBAND OF	OF THE CONSENT LETTER OF THE DONOR DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P8	THE TRUE COPY THE MOTHER OF T	OF THE CONSENT LETTER OF HE DONOR DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P9	THE TRUE COPY SUBMITTED BY 28.11.2020	OF FORM II APPLICATION THE PETITIONERS DATED
EXHIBIT P10	THE TRUE COPY SUBMITTED BY 28.11.2020	OF FORM 3 APPLICATION THE PETITIONERS DATED

¶53

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶54

//TRUE COPY//

¶55

PA TO JUDGE

Hussan P.P v. the District Level Authorization Comittee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hussan P.P v. the District Level Authorization Comittee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Candela Engineering Corporation Vs Corporation of Thrissur

Amal M Raja Vs the Regional Officer

Paily Abraham Vs Kerala Water Authority

Swaminathan Vs State of Kerala

Meera Lakshmi S. Vs State of Kerala

Eldho @ Eldhose Vs Government Medical College Hospital