IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
Moideenkuty, S/o. Paramban Veeran & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The District Level Authorisation Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs - Respondent
WP(C) No. 23509 of 2021
Decided On : 11-11-2021
Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 - Section 9 and 9(3A) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21 - Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 - Rule 7 - Restrictions on removal and transplantation of human organs or tissues or both - Authorisation Committee - Near relatives - Kidney transplantation - Seek to set aside order of Authorisation Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs - Whether words 'near relative' used in Section 9(3A) can crib and confine swap transplants only where donor and recipient of each pair are near relatives as defined under Section 2(i) of Act, 1994 - Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 is enacted to provide for regulation of removal, storage and transplantation of human organs and tissues for therapeutic purposes and for the prevention of commercial dealings in human organs. The prime purpose of the enactment is facilitating transplantation of human organs for therapeutic purpose.
Finding of the court: Where a citizen’s life can be protected and preserved only by transplant of human organ or tissue, the citizen has a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution to undergo organ transplantation, which right is subject only to the procedure established by law. Any law prescribing procedure for organ transplantation should therefore satisfy the test of reasonableness. When Section 9(3) permits transplant of organs to persons not being a near relative, with the prior approval of the Authorisation Committee, there is no logic or rationale to say that swap transaction will not be allowed when members of each pair are not near relatives, even if the Authorisation Committee approves such transaction - Order of respondent is set aside – Direction issued.
Result: Writ petition is allowed
JUDGMENT :
The petitioners are before this Court, aggrieved by the non-consideration of their Ext.P15 and Ext.P36 applications on merits. The petitioners seek to set aside Ext.P39 order of the Authorisation Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs.
2. There are four petitioners in the writ petition. Petitioners 1 and 3 are patients with Kidney problems. They require urgent transplantation of Kidneys. Petitioners 2 and 4 are ready to donate their Kidneys. The 2nd petitioner is the wife of the 3rd petitioner. The 4th petitioner is the father-in-law of the son of the 1st petitioner. In view of the mismatch of blood groups of 2nd and 3rd petitioners and of 1st and 4th petitioners, they submitted application for swap transplantation. Ext.P15 is the Form-3 and Form-11 applications submitted by the 1st petitioner. Ext.P36 is the Form-3, Form-4 and Form-11 applications submitted by the 3rd petitioner.
3. The Authorisation Committee, however, rejected both sets of applications holding that the petitioners do not come under the purview of ‘near relative’ as per the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act and Guidelines for altruistic and exchange donation issued as per G.O. (MS) No.26/2018/H&FWD dated 15.02.2018. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the 1st and the 3rd petitioners require urgent kidney transplantation and rejection of their applications would offend their right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
4. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, submitted that though the 2nd petitioner, being wife of the 3rd petitioner, would be a near relative, the 4th petitioner cannot be treated as a near relative as defined under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act. Therefore, the Authorisation Committee rightly rejected the applications holding that the petitioners do not come under the purview of ‘near relative’ as per the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act and Guidelines for altruistic and exchange donation issued as per G.O. (MS) No.26/2018/H&FWD dated 15.02.2018.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the respondent-District Level Authorisation Committee.
6. The Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 (Act No.42 of 1994) is enacted to provide for the regulation of removal, storage and transplantation of human organs and tissues for therapeutic purposes and for the prevention of commercial dealings in human organs and tissues and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act permits and regulates near relative organ transplantation as well as non-near relative transplantation subject to the provisions of the Act, 1994 and the Rules made thereunder.
7. Rule 2(i) defines “near relatives” as spouse, son, daughter, father, mother, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, grandson or granddaughter. Section 9 of the Act, 1994 reads as follows:
(1A) Where the donor or the recipient being near relative is a foreign national, prior approval of the Authorisation Committee shall be required before removing or transplanting human organ or tissue or both:
Provided that the Authorisation Committee shall not approve such removal or transplantation if the recipient is a foreign national and the donor is an Indian national unless they are near relatives.
(1B) No human organs or tissues or both shall be removed from the body of a minor before his death for the purpose of transplantation except in the manner as may be prescribed.
(1C) No human organs or tissues or both shall be removed from the body of a mentally challenge person before his death for the purpose of transplant
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.