The requirement for evidence of altruism in organ donation applications must be strictly adhered to, with appropriate certifications sought by authorities.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with the following prayers :-

“(i) issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P6 and to quash the same.

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the second respondent to reconsider Ext.P2 application and pass fresh orders as expeditiously as possible within a time frame fixed by the Hon’ble Court.

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the second respondent to allow Ext.P2 joint application submitted by the petitioners for renal transplantation forthwith.”

2. The 1^st petitioner is diagnosed with chronic kidney disease currently in stage ‘V’. He was advised to undergo urgent renal replacement therapy. Though an application was filed before the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs, Thrissur, along with a donor/neighbor of the 1st petitioner, the same was rejected on suspicion of commercial dealings behind the human organ donation. The appeal filed by the 1^st petitioner was also dismissed. The petitioner approached this Court challenging the dismissal of the application by the appellate authority. The renal transplantation from close relatives is not feasible in the case of the 1^st petitioner. His parents have expired. The blood groups of the wife and children are different. He has no brothers and his sisters have already expired. On coming to know of the serious nature of the disease affecting the 1st petitioner, the 2nd petitioner, who is his close friend, voluntarily came forward. He also became aware of the subsequent trauma suffered by the 1^st petitioner. Though Ext.P2 joint application was filed before the 2^nd respondent, the same was rejected as per Ext.P6 order dated 13.01.2026 stating that the donation is not satisfactorily explained. Aggrieved by Ext.P6 order, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the above writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

4. From the documents produced, it is seen that the 1^st petitioner is in a chronic condition and he is suggested to have a kidney transplant. Ext.P6 order dated 13.01.2026 was passed by the 2nd respondent, finding that altruism could not be established and that there was suspicion of monetary consideration and commercial dealings involved in the donation. It was further found that the reason for the donation was not satisfactorily explained and appeared unnatural. On a perusal of Ext.P6, it is seen that though the authorities entertained doubts regarding monetary consideration or commercial dealings, they failed to obtain an altruism certificate from the police authorities as held by this court in Soubiya v. District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs, Ernakulam . ( 2023 (6) KHC 293 ). In this case, no such certificate was sought for from the police authorities. Moreover, no proper reasons have been stated by the authorities while rejecting the application for kidney transplantation. The 2^nd respondent ought to have given proper reasons and if there were any doubts regarding altruism, ought to have obtained a certificate from the police authorities concerned. Since the 2nd respondent failed to do so, I find it appropriate to set aside the order passed by the 2nd respondent and direct them to reconsider the entire issue afresh.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as follows:-

Ext.P6 order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the 2^nd respondent is hereby set aside and the 2^nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter afresh within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, if the 2^nd respondent entertains any doubt regarding the absence of altruism, they shall obtain a certificat