The necessity of a Certificate of Altruism for organ donation applications may not be absolute under law.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the proposed donor of one Sri.P.K.Prakasan, who is a patient undergoing treatment for kidney related problems at the Aster Medicity Hospital, Ernakulam. Since Sri.P.K.Prakasan is seriously ill and admitted in hospital, the petitioner has approached this Court on his behalf also, seeking the following reliefs:-

“a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 and 2 to take immediate and effective steps to issue approval for unrelated kidney transplantation as per Ext.P6 and P7 applications, within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to accept and forward Ext.P6 and P7 applications with documents to the 1st respondent for consideration, without the certificate from the 3rd respondent.

c.Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to forward the report regarding altruism of the petitioner, in the event of request from 1st respondent.”

2. When the petitioner came to know about the disease of Sri.P.K.Prakasan, she expressed her readiness to donate her kidney. Since they are not close relatives, they approached the second respondent with Exts.P6 and P7 (Form 3 and Form 11) applications along with necessary documents except the altruism certificate, to refer the matter to the first respondent for getting necessary approval for unrelated organ transplantation. Since the third respondent has not issued the letter of altruism, the second respondent did not forward the same. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have approached this Court with the above writ petition.

3. The question whether a Certificate of Altruism is mandatory to accept the applications along with its supporting documents to be considered by the concerned authorisation committee was considered by this Court in Shoukathali Pullikuzhiyil and another v. the District Legal Authorization Committee and others [2017 (3) KHC 259] and it was held that verification through Police as a routine manner in all cases should be avoided and it is the Authorization Committee to take the decision.

4. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of with the following directions:

(a) The petitioner is hereby granted liberty to hand over all relevant documents to the 2nd respondent – Convener of Local Committee of Organ Transplantation, without a 'Certificate of Altruism' and this shall be done within a period of two weeks from today.

(b) The 2nd respondent – Convener of Local Committee of Organ Transplantation of the Hospital concerned, will forward the applications, along with all necessary documents, except ‘Certificate of Altruism’, to the 1st respondent – District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs (DLAC); and this shall be done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(c) On the afore application reaching the 1st respondent - DLAC, its competent Authority will notify the petitioner and inform whether they have to obtain a ‘Certificate of Altruism’ from the concerned Police Authority.

(d) If the DLAC is to find that no such Certificate is required in this case, they will complete the processes, leading to necessary permissions to be granted to the petitioner, within a period of one month thereafter.

(e) However, if, on the contrary, the DLAC is to find that ‘Certificate of Altruism’ is required to be obtained by the petitioner, they will intimate them of such within a period of two weeks from the date on which they receive application from the 2nd respondent; upon which, they will be required to obtain the same and produce it before the said Authority, a