Kirti Pandey And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Anand Pathak, J

Present petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution taking exception to order dated 29.02.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by Dean, G.R. Medical College, Gwalior whereby Authorisation Committee under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 directed the petitioners to provide relevant certificates as sought by the Committee as referred in impugned order dated 29.02.2024.

Learned counsel for petitioners while referring different provisions of Act, 1994 and Rules made in this regard vide Rules namely the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014 submits that petitioner No.1 - Smt. Kirti Pandey is suffering from renal problem and undergoing dialysis since July 2023. Petitioner No.2 is paternal aunt (cqvk) of her husband. Therefore, petitioner No.2 is aunt-in-law of petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.2 - Smt. Pramila Sharma wants to donate one of her kidneys to petitioner No.1 because of love and affection for her. She is not "near relative" as defined in Section 2(i) of Act, 1994 but she can be a donor (as per Section 2(f)) as per Section 9(3) of the Act, 1994. In said Section 9, restrictions on removal and transplantation of human organs or tissues or both are provided. A mechanism has been given in the provisions which contemplates composition of the Authorisation Committee. Said Committee consists of 7 members in which majority is of expert doctors.

According to learned counsel for petitioners, said Committee wants certain more documents regarding medical condition of different family members who fall under the definition of "near relative" whereas those "near relative" like brothers/sisters etc. are suffering from different ailments, therefore, they are not in position to donate their kidney to petitioner No.1 - Smt. Kirti Pandey. Counsel for petitioners fairly submits that petitioner No.2 who is Aunt-in-law is ready to give her kidney to petitioner No.1 but restrictions are raised. Although, she is ready to provide all necessary documents including medical papers regarding kidney condition of all family members/near relatives.

Learned counsel for respondents No. 4 and 5 at this stage submits that the moment petitioners provide necessary documents to the respondent-Committee, looking to the urgent nature of case appropriate decision shall be taken within no time.

Learned Additional Advocate General also fairly submits that all authorities shall take proactive steps if documentation is properly placed by the petitioners before the Committee.

After hearing all parties concerned, it appears that this is not a case of adversarial litigation. This is a case where all authorities have to stand on a common platform. Once authorities ensure that object of Act of 1994 and Rules made thereunder is meted out and when it is not a case of illegal removal of human organ and when donor and recipient have mentioned the facts in a prescribed manner before the authority, then authority shall have to proactively decide the case because it affects human lives.

Dean, Medical College and other members of the Authorisation Committee have to harbour the notion that this FILE with same alphabets contains a LIFE.

Petitioners are directed to provide all necessary medical papers/documents to the authority/Authorisation Committee by today evening or at best by tomorrow afternoon and if the documents are received by the Committee by tomorrow afternoon i.e. 2.4.2024 then the Members shall convene a meeting immediately and decide the case of petitioners next day or thereafter but not later than 4.4.2024 in accordance with law keeping in view the fact situation.

Learned Additional Advocate General is directed to coordinate in the matter. Relevant compliance report be filed, if advised so.

Matter be placed on 04.04.2024 for further orders.