Delhi High Court Fixes Timelines For Interviews, Decision Making Process In Organ Transplant Cases

The Delhi High Court on Thursday fixed timelines to be followed by the Authorisation Committee under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Rules, 2014, for conducting interviews and decision-making process in organ transplant cases.

Justice Prathiba M Singh observed that a time-bound approach is crucial to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of organ transplantation protocols and would also be in furtherance of the right to health under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“Every act that undermines human dignity amounts to a partial deprivation of the right to life. Such restrictions must align with a reasonable, fair, and just legal procedure that upholds other fundamental rights. To truly live is to live with dignity,” the court said.

Advocate Charu Aneja appearing for the petitioners submitted that no timelines exist for the Authorisation Committee to hold the interview under the 2014 Rules, leading to delays in deciding cases of transplants from living donors.

She further said that if timelines are not prescribed and the Authorisation Committee indefinitely adjourns hearings without meeting with the donor and their family, as well as the recipient and their family, the applications remain in suspended animation, causing prolonged suffering for the patient.

Justice Singh directed that the timeline for processing of the application for living donor transplantation must be maximum 10 days from the date of the said application.

Furthermore, the verification of the documents in respect of domicile status of the recipient or donor must be done with maximum of 14 days.

The court added that any opportunity given to the donor or recipient to complete the required documentation must be communicated to them within the prescribed timeline under the Rules.

“The donor or recipient should be given a maximum of one week to respond If further opportunities need to be given, the same ought to be given after due consideration, with a strict deadline. Upon expiry of this timeline, the case should be presented to the Authorisation Committee,” the court said.

Furthermore, Justice Singh directed that after 4 to 6 weeks from receiving the application, the interview ought to be scheduled within a two week period.

The court directed that during the said two week window, the Authorisation Committee ought to conduct the interview of the donor or recipient on one or two occasions, facilitate a meeting of their family members and convey the decision to them.

It added that the entire process, from submission to decision, ought not to ideally exceed 6 to 8 weeks. Furthermore, any appeal against an order has to be decided within a maximum of 30 days.

Justice Singh observed that a clear and prompt communication regarding the organ transplantation application is essential, whether oral or written, to enable the donor or recipient and their respective families to proceed with the decision-making process.

“The non-adherence to timelines has resulted in extended waiting periods of 2 to 3 years in some cases before a decision is made, which contradicts the intent as also the letter and spirit of the 1994 Act and the 2014 Rules. Such prolonged delays can cause significant mental and physical anguish for both the donor and recipient as also their families,” the court said.

Justice Singh was dealing with a plea moved by a kidney patient in 2020 who sought organ donation and challenged the indecision and delay of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in taking a decision on his kidney transplant. He passed away in March-April, 2021.

“The suggested timelines above are provided as a reference for the competent authority, enabling them to take an informed decision in this matter. Furthermore, the competent authority is expected to issue a proper communication to all stakeholders, prescribing timelines and ensuring their adherence,” the court said.

Justice Singh observed that the pre-transplantation interviews play a crucial role as the Authorisation Committee has to ascertain that there are no commercial considerations in the donor donating the organ to the donee.

The court observed that the said process of interview and documentation requires to be done in a timebound manner failing which the purpose of the process itself could be defeated.

“The complex nature of the process, in fact, tend to deter organ donation which would also not be in the overall interest of the society as a whole, in terms of the object sought to be achieved by the Act. The intention of the Act and Rules is to regulate organ donation and not to completely dissuade the same,” the court said.

Counsel for Petitioners: Ms. Charu Aneja, Adv

Counsel for Respondents: Mr Subhash Kumar, Adv. for R-1 & 2; Mr. Saroj Bidawat, Adv. for UOI/R-3; Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC GNCTD with Ms. Sheenu Priya, Mr. Sudhir Kumar Shukla & Mr. Sudhir Sumit Choudhary, Advs. for GNCTD

Title: AMAR SINGH BHATIA & ANR. v. SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 12

Click Here To Read Order