The competent authority in organ transplantation must evaluate cases with near relatives and ensure approval is not unjustifiably required, reaffirming the necessity for proper assessment based on medical fitness.

Order

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order of the 2^nd respondent, wherein the application of the petitioners for human transplantation of an organ, got rejected and prays for further direction to the respondents to permit the said human transplantation of an organ from the 2^nd petitioner to the

1^st petitioner.

2. The 1^st petitioner is an agriculturalist and the 2^nd petitioner is the mother of the 1^st petitioner. Case of the petitioners is that during November 2025, the 1^st petitioner fell ill and was diagnosed with Chronic Kidney Disease and he was advised to avail medical treatment at Chennai. The petitioners have come Chennai for treatment and approached the 3^rd respondent Hospital. While so, the Doctors in the 3^rd respondent Hospital have advised the 1^st petitioner to undergo renal transplantation surgery, for which the Doctors conducted a detailed pre-transplantation assessment and found the 2^nd petitioner mother as suitable donor and medically fit to donate her one kidney.

3. The petitioners in order to get appropriate authorisation, submitted an application dated 30.12.2025 under Form 11 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 through the 3^rd respondent Hospital to the 2^nd respondent. The petitioners have attended all enquiries and submitted relevant records. Inspite of that, the application for kidney transplantation had been rejected on 23.01.2026. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the 3^rd respondent had transmitted the petitioners application for kidney transplantation to the 2^nd respondent Committee, eventhough there is no need for such approval, when the donor is a near relative of the recipient under Section 9(1) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994. He further states that Rule 18 stipulates that the ‘’competent authority’’as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Act shall conduct the evaluation when the donor and recipient are not near relatives. In the present case on hand, the Competent authority is the 3^rd respondent Hospital, who evaluated that the 2^nd petitioner is medically fit to undergo surgery for organ transplantation. The 2^nd respondent without considering the above factual and legal position, had passed a cryptic order rejecting the application of the petitioners.

5. Learned Special Counsel appearing for the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the 2^nd petitioner was medically examined by a team of doctors and found that since she is aged about 64 years and she is having high risk of chronic kidney disease on post donation, the 2^nd respondent Committee declared the petitioner as unfit for proceeding to organ donation and passed the rejection order. Further, guidelines issued under Rule 23 of the Rules has been followed properly and fitness of the donor has been assessed.

6. Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials on record.

7. The relationship between the donor and donee is not in dispute. The 1^st petitioner is suffering from Chronic Kidney Disease and he is treated in the third respondent/hospital. The third respondent/hospital has also given certificate to the effect that the petitioner’s mother/donor is fit for such surgery. However, the Authorisation Committee Government has assessed the 2^nd petitioner / donor and rejected the application as she has medically unfit.

8. It is relevant to note that as per Rule 18 of the Rules, where, the proposed transplant of organs is between near relatives related genetically, namely, grandmother, grandfather, mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, grandson and granddaughter, above the ag