IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 457 of 2010(F)
1. JIMNESH.M., AGED 23 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
4. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,
5. THE CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT LEVEL
6. THE CHAIRMAN, AUTHORIZATION COMMITTEE
For Petitioner :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
For Respondent :SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :12/01/2010
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 457 of 2010-F
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner herein is aggrieved by Ext.P9 order by which the
Central Zone Authorisation Committee rejected his request for
transplantation of kidney. Accordingly, permission was refused.
2. The petitioner is aged 23 years. He is suffering from chronic
kidney failure and is on regular maintenance haemodialysis for the last two
years. He is undergoing treatment at West Fort Hi-Tech Hospital, Thrissur
for renal disorder. It is averred that the petitioner has to undergo dialysis
thrice in a week to sustain his life. Finally, the doctor advised that
transplantation of kidney is the only possible medical solution.
3. One Mr. P. Mohanan, a family friend of the petitioner is the donor
of kidney. Accordingly, consent was obtained and Ext.P2 was submitted
jointly by the petitioner and the said Mohanan before the 5th respondent.
4. The rejection of the permission is mainly on the ground of
suspected Altrusim of donor.
5. Learned Govt. Pleader on instructions, submitted that the 4th
respondent Director of Medical Education has directed the authority to
wpc 457/2010 2
reconsider the matter and appropriate steps will be taken in this regard
either by the Central Zone Committee or by the District Level Committee.
6. In the light of the urgency shown by the petitioner, learned counsel
for the petitioner prayed that a direction may be issued to the competent
authority to take a decision urgently. Therefore, there will be a direction to
respondents 4 to 6 to take a fresh decision in the matter within a period of
two weeks from today.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/