Court Says Due Process Was Violated
Madurai: In a significant ruling, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has set aside the Tamil Nadu government’s order cancelling the organ transplant licence of Cethar Hospital, Tiruchirappalli. The court observed that authorities failed to follow legal procedures and principles of natural justice before issuing the cancellation order.
Background: Alleged Kidney Transplant Racket
The case emerged after a suspected kidney transplant racket was uncovered in Namakkal. Brokers reportedly targeted poor textile workers and lured them into selling their kidneys for amounts between ₹5 and ₹10 lakh. The donors were taken to private hospitals—including Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College Hospital in Perambalur and Cethar Hospital in Trichy—and admitted using fraudulent documents to facilitate illegal transplants.
Licences Cancelled Over Forged Documents
Investigators found that both hospitals had submitted forged documents to obtain transplant approvals, violating provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994. Following this, the Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services permanently revoked their transplant licences. Cethar Hospital challenged this revocation before the High Court.
Court Notes Absence of Show-Cause Notice
Justice G.R. Swaminathan, hearing the petition, observed that the Health Department cancelled the hospital’s transplant licence without issuing a show-cause notice or offering an opportunity for the hospital to be heard. The court held that such steps are mandatory under Section 16 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994.
Arguments from Both Sides
Counsel for the hospital argued that authorities failed to comply with legal requirements, making the cancellation invalid. The state contended that the petition was not maintainable since the hospital had already filed an appeal under Section 17 and should not pursue multiple remedies simultaneously.
Court Rejects Fear of Public Backlash
When the state expressed concern about public reaction to restoring the hospital’s licence, the judge firmly noted that courts must remain insulated from public sentiment. “Judges have taken oath to uphold the law… They cannot worry what the people will think,” he remarked.
Suspension vs Cancellation: Legal Clarification
The court clarified that a licence may be suspended either as a punishment or during ongoing cancellation proceedings. While notice is mandatory before punitive suspension, it may be dispensed with during pending proceedings only if proper reasons are recorded in writing. The court held that the authorities did not follow this mandatory procedure.
Cancellation Declared Void
Stating that the cancellation order amounted to “rank illegality,” the court emphasized that the hospital’s reputation and right to carry on business could not be affected without a fair enquiry. Allowing the writ petition, the court ruled that the cancellation order was void and clarified that the previous suspension order would not revive, as it had merged with the cancellation order.
