IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
Ahamed Noushod - Appellant
Vs.
District Level Authorization Committee - Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 21075 of 2016
Decided On : 22-06-2016
Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act 1994 - Sections 3, 5 & 8 - Authority for removal of human organs or tissues or both - Removal of human organs or tissues or both in case of unclaimed bodies in hospital or prison -When can donate - Held, Petitioner that letter was insisted earlier as the rules then prevailing, Transplantation of Human Organs Rules, 1995 required the District Level Authorization Committee to satisfy that the donor is not a known person with criminal records - Said rules have now been replaced by the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 and the said Rules do not insist such a condition - Letter from the Deputy Superintendent of Police concerning the criminal antecedents of the donor is not required - Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules 2014
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
The petitioner is suffering from renal failure. He is advised by the doctors to transplant his kidney at the earliest. As per the provisions contained in the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act ('the Act' for short), the transplantation surgery can be carried out only with the sanction of the first respondent, the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs. As per the norms, the first respondent Committee would take up the issue only on a reference by the second respondent, the Local Level Committee for Organ Transplantation. The case of the petitioner is that the second respondent committee is not referring the application submitted by the petitioner for sanction to the first respondent committee on the ground that he has not produced all the documents required for the same as indicated in Ext.P5 check list. The case of the petitioner is that he has produced all the documents indicated in Ext.P5 check list except a letter from the Deputy Superintendent of Police concerning the criminal antecedents of the donor. It is stated by the petitioner that such a letter was insisted earlier as the rules then prevailing, namely, Transplantation of Human Organs Rules, 1995 required the District Level Authorization Committee to satisfy that the donor is not a known person with criminal records. According to the petitioner, the said rules have now been replaced by the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 and the said Rules do not insist such a condition.
2. On a perusal of the provisions contained in the Act as also the Rules referred to above, I find substance in the case set up by the petitioner. I do not find any need at all for the second respondent committee to insist a letter from the Deputy Superintendent of Police to forward the application submitted by the petitioner for sanction to the first respondent committee.
3. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to forward the application submitted by the petitioner and the accompanying documents for consideration to the first respondent committee without insisting the certificate of the Deputy Superintendent of Police referred to in Ext.P5 check list, forthwith. It is also directed that the first respondent Committee shall take a final decision in the matter within ten days from today.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.