Bangalore: The Appropriate Authority for the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act 1994, Karnataka, has issued an order to cancel the registration of Fortis hospital on Banneghatta Road to conduct human organ transplants.
The hospital had been indicted for having carrying out a pancreas transplantation without being registered for that particular organ, and conducting surgery without informed consent.
The order was passed on December 26, 2013 after the Authority examined a complaint lodged by a retired major, Pankaj Rai, after the death of his wife Seema Rai on May 6, 2010.
The Karnataka High Court, which has been hearing the case since 2011, gave the Appropriate Authority for the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994, 10 weeks from OctoÂber 3, 2013 to decide on the controversy. A division bench comprising of Justice N. Kumar and Justice V. Suri Appa Rao passed the order.
After evaluating the views of both the parties, the Appropriate Authority stated in its orders that the hospital violated Section 14 (1) of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissue Act, 1994, as it conducted the transplantation of a pancreas for Seema Rai even though it did not possess a registration certification for the organ.
The hospital has also violated Section 12 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissue Act, 1994 as it did not take the informed consent of the patient in the manner prescribed.
The Appropriate Authority unanimously decided to cancel the registration of the hospital (registration No. MDM/26/09-10 dated 25-03-2010) as per sectÂion 16 of the Transplantation of HumÂan Organ and Tissue Act 1994.
Major Pankaj Rai had complained to several authorities against the hospital and doctors, alleging negligence and holding them responsible for the death of his wife, who died after undergoing kidney and pancreas transplants at the hospital.
“I have gone through the huÂman organ traÂnsplÂantation registration of top corporate hospitals in the city, where pancreas has clearly been mentioned. But in case of this hospital there is no mention of pancreas in the registration certificate. Only kidney, liver and homograft have been mentioned,” Raj said.
When contacted, a hospital official said, “The current order pertains to a case dating back to May 2010. At this point, we are studying the order in which the ApprÂopriate Authority has given certain observations for the first time. Although we are respectful of the order, we reserve the right to appeal, as we believe that the surgeons had performed the procedure in the best medical interest of the patient.”
