Back
Progressive AP Lags Behind? High Court Spotlights Missing Bone Marrow Transplant Lifelines
In a stark wake-up call for public healthcare, the
has questioned why a
"progressive State like Andhra Pradesh"
lacks Bone Marrow Transplantation (BMT) facilities in its government hospitals. A
of
Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur
and
Justice Challa Gunaranjan
, hearing
WP(PIL) No. 12 of 2026
filed by Guntha Venkata Sai Kumar (in person), directed the state to file an affidavit detailing timelines for introducing the specialized procedure with trained staff. The
order also nudged authorities to consider raising reimbursement limits under the
Dr. N.T.R. Vaidya Seva
scheme (formerly Dr. Y.S.R. Aarogyasri).
The Deadly Void in Government Wards
The PIL shines a light on a grim reality: while private hospitals charge exorbitant fees for BMT—a complex, prolonged treatment essential for conditions like leukemia—government-run hospitals and medical colleges in Andhra Pradesh offer none. Introduced via G.O.Rt.No.694 in 2020, the scheme caps coverage at ₹11 lakh for patients over 14 and ₹10 lakh for those under, yet many still die due to financial barriers. The petitioner pointed to neighboring states providing near-free BMT in public facilities, urging Andhra Pradesh to catch up.
Petitioner's Plea vs. State's Initial Response
Guntha Venkata Sai Kumar argued that the absence of public BMT units forces the poor into unaffordable private care, leading to preventable deaths. He highlighted how other states have bridged this gap, questioning why Andhra Pradesh—a self-proclaimed progressive leader—hasn't.
The state, represented by , acknowledged the issue, stating the government is "contemplating introduction" of BMT in public hospitals. No detailed counterarguments were advanced, but the court pressed for concrete plans.
Court's Razor-Sharp Reasoning: Capability Isn't the Issue
No precedents were cited, but the bench drew on the constitutional imperative of accessible healthcare, implicitly invoking 's right to life. The judges rejected any notion of incapacity, emphasizing that if neighboring states can deliver, so can Andhra Pradesh. They mandated an affidavit addressing setup challenges, trained faculty needs, and timelines, while listing the matter for .
Key Observations from the Bench
"The issue that has been highlighted in the presentis quite important and relevant and that is to the extent that there is no provision for conducting a Bone Marrow Transplantation (BMT), which is highly expensive procedure and is to be undertaken over a period of time, in any of the hospitals/medical colleges run in the Government Sector."
"In our opinion, if the other states in the country could provide for such a treatment, we have no reason to believe that a progressive State like Andhra Pradesh does not have such a capacity or have not conceived a programme whereby such a treatment could be made available in Government run hospitals or the medical colleges."
"Let an affidavit be filed giving the timelines within which the aforementioned procedures could be successfully undertaken with trained faculty."
"The Government may also, in the meantime, consider increasing the upper limit for financial reimbursement to the patients affected with the disease which requires such a treatment."
Roadmap to Relief: Affidavits, Timelines, and Possible Funding Boost
The court issued no final ruling but set the stage for accountability. The state must respond with actionable timelines, potentially fast-tracking BMT units. Meanwhile, hiking Aarogyasri caps could save lives immediately. This interim directive could spur policy shifts, pressuring other states and setting a benchmark for PIL-driven healthcare reforms—ensuring no one dies waiting for a lifeline.
